Tag Archives: King of the North

Daniel 11, the rise of the king of the North. Verses 17-27


I hate making rookie mistakes, but I am prone to the same errors many of you have encountered; that is, as I was going through my notes I noticed Daniel 11:15, 16 were missing. That would mean that I might have skipped by them when I did the bible study; maybe not. So, for the sake of completion I quickly added them in the previous post; however, this is where I made the rookie error. Note my comments.

Daniel 11:16 NASB “But he who comes against him will do as he pleases, and no one will be able to withstand him; he will also stay for a time in the Beautiful Land, with destruction in his hand.

As you saw in verse fifteen, there will be no strength to make a stand.

  • But he who comes against him will do as he pleases, and no one will be able to withstand him;”

    Antiochus III – also known as Antiochus the Great, is a forerunner and interchangeable with the Antichrist that is coming.

  • he will also stay for a time in the Beautiful Land, with destruction in his hand.”

    The Revised Version translates the verse this way, “and he shall stand in the glorious land, and in his hand shall be destruction.”
    This is indicative of what will happen to Israel by the hand of Antichrist.

It seems harmless enough, but the most direct descendant would be Antiochus Epiphanes (IV), for he is the one who desecrated the temple; and, he is the one scholars tend to agree, they agree, is the pattern for the Antichrist that is coming. But, as I looked again at the descriptives I see in Antiochus the III, are there things here that fit the Antichrist? Yes. Are there exceptions? Yes. An example might be:

Daniel 11:42-45 RV He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape. 43) But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps. 44) But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: and he shall go forth with great fury to destroy and utterly to make away many. 45) And he shall plant the tents of his palace between the sea and the glorious holy mountain; yet, he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.

We will get to Daniel 11:42-45 eventually, but for the moment pay attention to the idea that “he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.” One might say that this alone indicates that he is not invincible, and he isn’t, but it is only the return of Jesus Christ to earth that puts a stop to this guy. Look at the context of the verses I included and you can see things like Egypt shall not escape; he shall have power over the treasures; “and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.

In case there is any doubt that this guy meets his end, I give you:

Revelation 19:19-20 RV And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat upon the horse, and against his army. 20) And the beast was taken and with him the false prophet that wrought the signs in his sight, wherewith he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image: they twain were cast alive into the lake of fire that burneth with brimstone:

Yes, the Antichrist persona is also known as the beast.


Let’s continue on with Daniel 11; and yes, it actually took me four weeks to cover my notes, but I rushed through chapter 12 and I wish I had not done that.

Antiochus the Great and Ptolemy V come to terms. Antiochus gives Ptolemy his daughter who later helps her husband defeat the plans of Antiochus.

Daniel 11:17 NIV He will determine to come with the might of his entire kingdom and will make an alliance with the king of the South. And he will give him a daughter in marriage in order to overthrow the kingdom, but his plans will not succeed or help him.

He, is Antiochus the Great/AKA, Antiochus III.

  • To set one’s face in any direction is to determine to go there. The meaning here is, that Antiochus, flushed with success, and resolved to push his conquests to the utmost, would make use of all the forces at his disposal to overcome the Egyptians, and to bring them into subjection to his sway. He had driven Scopas from Coelo-Syria, and from Sidon; had subjected the land of Palestine to his control, and now nothing seemed to prevent his extending his conquests to the utmost limits of his ambition. [Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible]

  • From the IVPBBC – Antiochus III’s defeat by the Roman, Scipio (191, 190). The increasing Roman control in Greece was established by a peace accord in 196. The Greeks who were unhappy with this new state of affairs made contact with Antiochus, urging him to come to their aid.

    By this time, Antiochus, anticipating that he would need to neutralize Egypt, had entered a marriage alliance, sending his daughter, Cleopatra, to be Ptolemy V’s bride. He expected her to also be a useful spy, but in this he was disappointed as her loyalties turned to her new husband.

Daniel 11:18 NIV Then he will turn his attention to the coastlands and will take many of them, but a commander will put an end to his insolence and will turn his insolence back on him.

Nevertheless, he made his move toward Greece in 192.

Constantly shifting alliances eventually worked against him, and he lost a large portion of his ten thousand troops at Thermopylae in 191.

Antiochus III then resorted to sea battle to try to keep the Romans out of Asia Minor but was again unsuccessful.

By 190 the larger Seleucid army of seventy-thousand men had arrived to reinforce Antiochus’s positions. Roman troops under Scipio were only half this strength when the forces met at Magnesia (about fifty miles north of Ephesus). Yet due to lack of training and tactical errors on the part of the Seleucid army, Antiochus was defeated and much of his army slaughtered.

Daniel 11:19 NIV After this, he will turn back toward the fortresses of his own country but will stumble and fall, to be seen no more.

The terms of surrender were humiliating, devastating and accepted without argument. IVPBBC

Daniel 11:20 AMPC+ Then shall stand up in his place or office one who shall send an exactor of tribute to pass through the glory of the kingdom, but within a few days he shall be destroyed, [yet] neither in anger nor in battle.

Let’s try reading it from the NIV.

Daniel 11:20 NIV “His successor will send out a tax collector to maintain the royal splendor. In a few years, however, he will be destroyed, yet not in anger or in battle.

Who is this successor?

  • Seleucus IV Philopator (187-175). This son of Antiochus III had a relatively peaceful reign and appeared to have maintained favorable relations with Jerusalem. The exception alluded to in this verse was when he dispatched one of his chief officials, Heliodorus, to Jerusalem to seize funds that were reported to be either in excess of what was needed or hoarded by anti-Seleucid factions. Before the high priest, Onias III could get to Antioch to appeal the decision and offer explanation,

  • Seleucus was assassinated in a plot carried out by Heliodorus, with Antiochus IV suspected by historians of complicity. IVPBBC

Who gained the most from the murder of Seleucus IV’s murder? Antiochus IV.

Antiochus Epiphanes and dealings with Israel are pictured in Daniel 11:21-34.

He obtains his rule by flattery.

Daniel 11:21 AMPC+ And in his place or office [in Syria] shall arise a contemptuous and contemptible person, to whom royal majesty and honor of the kingdom have not been given. But he shall come in without warning in time of security and shall obtain the kingdom by flatteries, intrigues, and cunning hypocritical conduct. [Dan 8:9-12, Dan 8:23-25]

CJB “There will arise in his place a despicable man not entitled to inherit the majesty of the kingdom, but he will come without warning and gain the kingdom by intrigue.

a contemptuous and contemptible person – The NASB translated this as despicable. The Hebrew word is, bāzāh: A verb meaning to hold in contempt or to despise. The verb means to hold in disdain, to disrespect. It can mean to prefer something more than the thing despised,

  • Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175-164). Antiochus IV, the brother of Seleucus, had been in Rome as a political hostage and was just returning (he had got as far as Athens) when the assassination of his brother took place.

  • His goals included converting Jerusalem into a center for Greek culture and helping the Jews to make the transition to becoming Greek citizens with Greek ways.

  • The intrigues that he became involved in were many, but certainly, the main one concerning Jerusalem was how he handled the high priesthood.

  • The text calls him contemptible, and indeed he was. His title “Epiphanes” means “god manifest”—but the people preferred “Epimanes”—“madman.” While he was certainly a member of the royal line, the throne should have gone to Seleucus’s son, Demetrius (who instead was taking Antiochus’s place as hostage in Rome). Another intrigue concerned the throne. He set up a coregency with his nephew (a minor), who a few years later was murdered. IVPBBC

Keep in mind that Antiochus IV Epiphanes is the forerunner for the false prophet of the end times.

Question? How many beasts are we talking about? The Antichrist gets that title, as does the false prophet, and then there are the four empires with lions heads and bears paws, and also that multi-headed beast that emerges from the sea and one of the heads sustains what seems to be a mortal wound. The point is that both characters, the Antichrist and the false prophet, have such similar and destructive characteristics, and, they are both called beasts.

He makes a league with the high priest; deals deceitfully and becomes strong.

Daniel 11:22 CJB Large armies will be broken and swept away before him, as well as the prince of the covenant.

I need to show you a contrasting version.

Daniel 11:22 KJV 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.

And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken,… That is, by the help of the forces of Eumenes and Attalus, which were like an inundation of water, the party that were on the side of Heliodorus the usurper were bore down, crushed, and destroyed; and thereby Antiochus had a peaceable settlement in the kingdom: or, “the arms of a flood shall be overflowed from before him, and be broken” (r); either the arms of Heliodorus, the forces he had got together; or the armies of the Egyptians, which, like an overflowing flood, had used to run over Judea, Coelesyria, Phoenicia, and other places, and carry all before them, now should be overflowed, and bore down themselves. [John Gill’s commentary]

  • prince of the covenant. Onias III was detained by Antiochus, and in the interim Jason, his brother conspired to usurp his position. He (Jason) paid a considerable sum to Antiochus and offered to be cooperative in the Hellenization of Judea (promotion of Greek culture at the expense of Jewish practices).

  • Three years later Menelaus, with the probable support of the Tobiads, paid a larger sum and, the precedent having been established, was awarded the office over Jason.

  • According to 2 Maccabees, Onias was murdered about 171.

  • Many identify him as the prince of the covenant referred to in this verse, but others attach that title to Ptolemy VI (see below). The overwhelming army in some way represents the opponents to Antiochus’s reign. This could include internal political opponents, Jewish antagonists or foreign opposition such as that which develops in Egypt. IVPBBC

Daniel 11:23 CJB Alliances will be made with him, but he will undermine them by deceit. Then, although he will have but a small following, he will emerge and become strong.

The meaning of this seems to be, that at first, his own forces would be small; that he would go up in such a way as not to excite suspicion, but that, either by an increase of his forces there, by uniting himself to confederates, by alluring the people by the promise of rewards, or by gradually taking one town after another and adding them to his dominions, he would become strong. Jahn (Heb. Commonwealth, p. 263) says, “with a small body of troops he made himself master of Memphis, and of all Egypt as far as Alexandria, almost without striking a blow.” IVPBBC

Daniel 11:24 NET. In a time of prosperity for the most productive areas of the province he will come and accomplish what neither his fathers nor their fathers accomplished. He will distribute loot, spoils, and property to his followers, and he will devise plans against fortified cities, but not for long.

into tranquillity, and the fattest places of the province” (s); that is, into such places as were in great tranquillity, and men thought themselves safe and secure, and had no suspicion of his designs upon them, and which abounded in wealth and riches: these were either the principal cities in the kingdom of Syria, which he visited in order to establish himself in their good opinion of him; or the chief places of the province of Phoenicia, where he endeavoured to make himself acceptable by his munificence; or it may be the best parts of the kingdom of Egypt are meant, the richest of them, such as Memphis, and the places about it; where, as Sutorius in Jerome says, he went; and which places being fat, producing a large increase, and abounding in wealth, invited him thither; and which wealth he took, and scattered among his friends and soldiers, as in a following clause:

and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers’ fathers; none of his ancestors, more near or more remote; not Antiochus the great, nor Seleucus Ceraunus, nor Seleucus Callinicus, nor Antiochus Theos, nor Antiochus Soter, nor Seleucus Nicator, the founder of the Syrian empire; for, however greater these might be in power or riches, they were inferior to him in success; though they all, or most of them, however, had their eye upon Egypt, and would gladly have been masters of it; yet none of the kings of Syria prevailed over it, as Antiochus did; and this may also refer to what follows:

he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches; which he took from the places or rich cities he entered into; and these he plentifully and liberally dispersed among his followers, his soldiers, “the small people” he became strong with, Dan_11:23, whereby he gained their affections and attached them to his interest; and in this his liberality and munificence he is said to abound above all the kings that were before him, in the Apocrypha: John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible

Makes war against Ptolemy of Egypt who is betrayed and killed and his army defeated.

Daniel 11:25 NIV “With a large army he will stir up his strength and courage against the king of the South. The king of the South will wage war with a large and very powerful army, but he will not be able to stand because of the plots devised against him.

First Egyptian War, 169. Antiochus’s dreams of adding Egypt to his kingdom were finally acted on in 169. His invasion was prompted by Egypt’s growing animosity and may even have been in response to Egypt’s military action, since the first encounter (November 170) was between Pelusium and Gaza. Nonetheless, Antiochus succeeded in capturing the city of Memphis and securing the surrender of Ptolemy VI. IVPBBC

Daniel 11:26 NIV Those who eat from the king’s provisions will try to destroy him; his army will be swept away, and many will fall in battle.

Ptolemy VI Philometor (181-146). Ptolemy VI was young when he came to the throne and was aided by two officials, Eulaeus and Lenaeus, who stirred up antagonism against Syria. The humiliation of Ptolemy in the First Egyptian War is thought to have been the result of bad advice given by his two advisors with the intention of undermining him. IVPBBC

Daniel 11:27 NIV The two kings, with their hearts bent on evil, will sit at the same table and lie to each other, but to no avail because an end will still come at the appointed time.

Unsuccessful siege of Alexandria. After his successful siege of Memphis, the citizens of Alexandria defied him by making Ptolemy’s younger brother king. Antiochus took immediate steps to break their revolt but was unable to take the city. As soon as he had returned to Syria, Ptolemy VI disavowed any loyalty to Antiochus and his coregency with his brother was reinstated. IVPBBC

Daniel 11, the rise of the kings of the North and South. Verses 5-16.


Alexander is dead and now we have four generals struggling for power. At the end of this power struggle, two will remain, but one seems to take central focus as it integrates the Assyrian empires, and has interactions with the Roman empire, and battles with the South – the Egyptian/Ptolemaic empire.

The four generals: Lysimachus; Cassander; Ptolemy Lagidae; Seleucus I.

Daniel 11:5 AMPC+ Then the king of the South (Egypt) shall be strong, but one of his princes shall be stronger than he is and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion.

One of the most powerful of those monarchies, if not “the” most powerful, was Egypt.

  • the king of the South (Egypt) shall be strong. – This was Ptolemy l

  • but one of his princes shall be stronger than he is and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion.”

    Albert Barnes commentary indicates: “The meaning of this passage is, that there would be “one of his princes,” that is, of the princes of Alexander, who would be more mighty than the one who obtained Egypt, or the south, and that he would have a more extended dominion. The reference is, doubtless, to Seleucus Nicator, or the conqueror. In the division of the empire, he obtained Syria, Babylonia, Media, Susiana, Armenia, a part of Cappadocia, and Cilicia, and his kingdom stretched from the Hellespont to the Indus.”

      • This is Seleucus Nicator, also known as, the king of the north.

The league between Egypt, the south, and Syria, the north, through the marriage of Bernice, daughter of Ptolemy Philadelphus, to Antiochus Theos, the third king of Syria.

Verse 7: A branch of her roots; a brother, Ptolemy Euergetes.

Daniel 11:6,7 AMPC+ At the end of some years they [the king of the North, Syria, and the king of the South, Egypt] shall make an alliance; the daughter of the king of the South shall come to the king of the North to make [a just and peaceful marriage] agreement; but she shall not retain the power of her might, neither shall he and his might endure. She shall be handed over with her attendants, her child, and him who strengthened her in those times. (7) But out of a branch of the [same ancestral] roots as hers shall one [her brother] stand up in his place or office, who shall come against the [Syrian] army and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the North and shall deal against them and shall prevail.

  • At the end of some years they [the king of the North, Syria, and the king of the South, Egypt] shall make an alliance;”

    This was done through marriage.

  • the daughter of the king of the South shall come to the king of the North to make [a just and peaceful marriage] agreement”

    These prophecies seem to have been fulfilled many years later in the Seleucid wars between Egypt and Syria. In 252 B.C., Ptolemy II of Egypt (“the south”) gave his daughter Berenice in marriage to Antiochus II of Syria (“the north”) to finalize a peace treaty between their two lands.

  • but she shall not retain the power of her might, neither shall he and his might endure”

    But Berenice was murdered in Antioch by Antiochus II’s former wife, Laodice.

  • She shall be handed over with her attendants, her child, and him who strengthened her in those times”

    Berenice’s brother, Ptolemy III, ascended the Egyptian throne and declared war against the Seleucids to avenge his sister’s murder.” Life Application Study Bible

  • But out of a branch of the [same ancestral] roots as hers shall one [her brother] stand up in his place or office, who shall come against the [Syrian] army and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the North and shall deal against them and shall prevail.”

Daniel 11:8 AMPC+ And also he (Ptolemy III Euergetes (246-221)) shall carry off to Egypt their [Syria’s] gods with their molten images and with their precious vessels of silver and of gold, and he shall refrain for some years from [waging war against] the king of the North.

Ptolemy III, ascended the Egyptian throne and declared war against the Seleucids to avenge his sister’s murder.

Pay attention to the phrase: “And also he shall carry off to Egypt their [Syria’s] gods with their molten images” Both the north and the south had their select gods. Soon we will see Antiochus Epiphanes substituting other gods from Rome and Greece. Why is this a problem; I thought Alexander was Greek? The problem is that all of the northern empires up to Antiochus IV were distinctly Syrian. Look at a map of this time period and you will see territories covering from Asia Minor to the furthest reaches of Babylon and South to Palestine.

Daniel 11:9 AMPC+ And he [the king of Syria –Seleucus II Callinicus (246-226)] shall come into the kingdom of the king of the South but shall return to his own land.

    • Seleucus II Callinicus (246-226). Laodice’s son, Seleucus II, emerged the beneficiary of all of the treachery and intrigue of his mother. In 243 he attempted to gain control of southern Syria and Palestine. Not only was he unsuccessful, but the momentum turned against him and he ended up losing territory. IVPBBC

A question: What is Israel doing while all this is going on? Hanging by a thread.

Defeat of Antiochus the Great by Ptolomy lll of Egypt (the south.)

Daniel 11:10 AMPC+ But his sons shall be stirred up and shall prepare for war and shall assemble a multitude of great forces, which shall come on and overflow and pass through and again shall make war even to the fortress [of the king of the South].

    • Seleucus III (226-223). For the last fifteen years of his reign, Seleucus II was engaged in an ongoing struggle with his brother, Antiochus Hierax. Both died about the same time, and Seleucus III came to the throne. Verse ten telescopes the events of the next ten years. Seleucus III was killed in a campaign against Pergamum in Asia Minor. He was succeeded by his brother, Antiochus III, who began mustering troops for the Fourth Syrian War (221-217) against Ptolemy IV. IVPBBC

    • Ptolemy IV Philopator (221-203). For most of the years of the Fourth Syrian War, Ptolemy IV had little success militarily against Antiochus (lll) the Great and only forestalled his progress south through repeated diplomatic initiatives. Many of Antiochus’s successes were carried out with the help of traitors rather than through military power or genius. In fact his lackadaisical tactics allowed Ptolemy to gather, train and field a significant armed force by 217. IVPBBC

Antiochus the Great (III)(Syria/the north), renews the war after fourteen years and defeats Ptolemy V (Egypt/the south.)

Daniel 11:11-13 AMPC+ And the king of the South (Egypt) shall be moved with anger and shall come forth and fight with the king of the North (Syria); and he [the Syrian king] shall set forth a great multitude, but the multitude shall be given into his [the Egyptian king’s] hand. 12) When the multitude is taken and carried away, the heart and mind [of the Egyptian king] shall be exalted, and he shall cast down tens of thousands, but he shall not prevail. 13) For the king of the North shall raise a multitude greater than [he had] before, and after some years shall certainly return, coming with a great army and much substance and equipment.

    • Fourth and Fifth Syrian Wars. In 217 Ptolemy IV engaged Antiochus III at the Battle of Raphia for what would turn out to be the climactic battle of the Fourth Syrian War. Raphia was a traditional dividing line between Palestine and Egypt, about twenty miles southwest of Gaza on the Mediterranean coast. Antiochus claimed an army of seventy thousand, but even with the superior size of his armies he was beaten badly by the Egyptians. This victory restored Syro-Palestine to the control of the Ptolemies. This status was maintained until the death of Ptolemy IV in 204 (13 years). The suspicious circumstances of the death of Ptolemy IV (still in his thirties) brought his six-year-old son, Ptolemy V Epiphanes (204-180), to the throne of Egypt. Antiochus took the opportunity of conflict over who was in charge to initiate the Fifth Syrian War (202-200), allied with Philip V of Macedon. IVPBBC

Daniel 11:14-16 NIV “In those times many will rise against the king of the South. Those who are violent among your own people will rebel in fulfillment of the vision, but without success. 15) Then the king of the North will come and build up siege ramps and will capture a fortified city. The forces of the South will be powerless to resist; even their best troops will not have the strength to stand. 16) The invader [Antiochus the Great] will do as he pleases; no one will be able to stand against him. He will establish himself in the Beautiful Land and will have the power to destroy it.

  • He will establish himself in the Beautiful Land and will have the power to destroy it.

    The beautiful land = Jersualem.

    • Antiochus III’s occupation of Palestine. The Battle of Gaza in 201 gained Antiochus temporary control of Palestine, but he was pushed back again by Egyptian forces under the command of Scopas. In the next year, however, at the Battle of Panion (at one of the sources of the Jordan; the New Testament Caesarea Philippi, modern Banias), Antiochus defeated the Egyptians and took control of Palestine from them for the last time. At the same time, the Romans were getting a foothold in Greece in the Second Macedonian War. IVPBBC

At this point in time we have a member of the Seleucid family Antiochus III / aka: Antiochus the Great, a Syrian (hold that idea loosely), standing at the Southern boundary of the Seleucid empire, what they are calling Palestine. We know it as Jerusalem.

Daniel 11:14 speaks of violent men. The book of 3 Maccabees records a visit of Ptolemy IV to Jerusalem after the Battle of Raphia in which he was treated very badly when he wished to enter the temple. There is a question concerning the historicity of the account. There were pro-Seleucid (led by Onias II, the high priest) and pro- Ptolemaic factions (from the powerful Tobiad family, competitors for the office of high priest) within Judea at this period. Sources do not provide enough information to determine which party might be alluded to in this verse.

    • Violent men. – The Hebrew word is per-eets’ and means violent, that is, a tyrant: – destroyer, ravenous, robber.

      Jeremiah 7:11 NASB “Has this house, which is called by My name, become a den of robbers in your sight? Behold, I, even I, have seen it,” declares the LORD.

      Here the word per-eets’ was translated as robber.

      Ezekiel 7:20-22 NASB ‘They transformed the beauty of His ornaments into pride, and they made the images of their abominations and their detestable things with it; therefore I will make it an abhorrent thing to them. 21) ‘I will give it into the hands of the foreigners as plunder and to the wicked of the earth as spoil, and they will profane it. 22) ‘I will also turn My face from them, and they will profane My secret place; then robbers will enter and profane it.

      Once again the word per-eets’ was translated as robber instead of violent

  • He will establish himself in the Beautiful Land and will have the power to destroy it.”

    The Hebrew word āmaḏ carries a variety of meanings with a range emotions; such as: abide (behind), appoint, arise, cease, confirm, continue, dwell, be employed, endure, establish.

    The NASB states that he has destruction in his hand. I suppose that is another way of saying Jerusalem was at his mercy. The word for destruction is kâlâh and seems to be an adversarial word since completion; can be the absolute opposite of destruction.

Daniel 11:15 NASB “Then the king of the North will come, cast up a siege ramp and capture a well-fortified city; and the forces of the South will not stand their ground, not even their choicest troops, for there will be no strength to make a stand.

Antiochus III’s occupation of Palestine. The Battle of Gaza in 201 gained Antiochus temporary control of Palestine, but in the next year at the Battle of Panion Antiochus defeated the Egyptians and took control of Palestine from them for the last time.

11:14 speaks of violent men and I believe that theme holds true when we consider, not only Antiochus III, but the Antichrist persona that is coming. While the book of 3 Maccabees records a visit of Ptolemy IV to Jerusalem after the Battle of Raphia in which he was treated very badly when he wished to enter the temple. This is nothing in comparison to what we see in scripture.

Daniel 11:16 NASB “But he who comes against him will do as he pleases, and no one will be able to withstand him; he will also stay for a time in the Beautiful Land, with destruction in his hand.

As you saw in verse fifteen, there will be no strength to make a stand.

  • But he who comes against him will do as he pleases, and no one will be able to withstand him;”

    Antiochus III – also known as Antiochus the Great, is a forerunner and interchangeable with the Antichrist that is coming.

  • he will also stay for a time in the Beautiful Land, with destruction in his hand.”

    The Revised Version translates the verse this way, “and he shall stand in the glorious land, and in his hand shall be destruction.”

    This is indicative of what will happen to Israel at the hand of Antichrist.

Daniel chapter 11 – The Kings of the South and the North. Verses 1-4.


Let me apologize for the lack of posts, as I have been working on other things since delivering this bible study. Also, since getting some advice from a friend who used to moderate a blog site, I have been conscious of the length. Initially, I intended to post all of chapter 11, but if you were to print it out it would be twenty pages long. It took me three weeks to deliver. And, as you will see, it comes off as a rather intense history lesson. Consider the way God delivers information and how He speaks about the future. This is precisely why critics have found it easy to say, this was written after the fact. That is not the case and I attempted to make it clear, through timelines, explanation, and the interjection of historical aspects.

Daniel chapter 11 – The Kings of the South and the North

A history of the Middle East from Darius to the future Antichrist. Daniel 11:1-34

Calvary Chapel Pastor David Guzik tells us, “This chapter contains one of the most specifically fulfilled prophecies of the Bible, predicting history over some 375 years, and to the end of known time, with amazing accuracy.

Chuck Missler agrees with David Guzik when he says, “That the chapter is so specific, that many critics and scholars who deny supernatural revelation, have insisted that it is history, written after the fact, fraudulently claiming to be prophecy.”

I realize we are working on chapter 11, but for the sake of understanding, How did Daniel 10 begin?

Daniel 10:1 In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia (550 -530BC) a message was revealed to Daniel,

By comparison, how does Daniel 11 start out?

Daniel 11:1 And in the first year of Darius the Mede (522-486BC), I stood to strengthen him and to provide protection for him.)

  • in the first year of Darius the Mede (522-486BC),

    This is a chronological gap of over 25 years.

    While the statement, “in the first year of Darius the Mede,” might seem unimportant Daniel is giving us several clues. One clue speaks specifically to when this event happened.

    Since Darius the Mede is the third aspect of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue, then we know that a fourth empire is coming. However, that fourth empire, if we attempt a chronological accounting, is Grecian. And, even then, after Alexander’s death, there were four Grecian General’s that ruled in Alexander’s stead. God, it seems, is going to bypass the four and focus on the lineage of the one that has the greatest impact on Israel.

    Timeline from Nebuchadnezzar to Darius

  • I stood to strengthen him and to provide protection for him.”

    An alternate translation says I stood to be “an encouragement …” This actually sounds like the character of Daniel.

     

  • Him” is a reference to Darius.

    Isn’t that odd? You would assume that God would be like us and only take care of His own. But, who is to say that Darius does not belong to God as well.

     

    In Isaiah, it says that God sent Israel to Babylon.

     

    Isaiah 43:14 NASB Thus says the LORD your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel, “For your sake I have sent to Babylon, And will bring them all down as fugitives, Even the Chaldeans, into the ships in which they rejoice.

    In Jeremiah, Israel is told that they will be given into the hand of the king of Babylon.

     

    Jeremiah 20:4 NASB “For thus says the LORD, ‘Behold, I am going to make you a terror to yourself and to all your friends; and while your eyes look on, they will fall by the sword of their enemies. So I will give over all Judah to the hand of the king of Babylon, and he will carry them away as exiles to Babylon and will slay them with the sword.

    Who arose or stood to strengthen him?

    In chapter 10 verses 19,20 we established that Gabriel was speaking, and may well be the speaker here. However, if this is Daniel speaking, in what ways could Daniel have sought or provided protection for Darius? While we have certainly perceived Daniel to be a purveyor of wisdom, to several captor kings, being a protector has never been implied. One thing you need to keep in mind is that Daniel has, while in Babylon, been under subjection to a series of kings that were willing to end your life in a hurry, especially if you were a captive slave.

     

Four more kings over Persia before Alexander the Great.

Daniel 11:2 “And now I will tell you the truth. Behold, three more kings are going to arise in Persia. Then a fourth will gain far more riches than all of them; as soon as he becomes strong through his riches, he will arouse the whole empire against the realm of Greece.

  • “And now I will tell you the truth. Behold, three more kings are going to arise in Persia.”

    Daniel 2:31-45. Nebuchadnezzar is the head of gold, Cyrus the Mede, the shoulders of silver, and Darius, the Persian, the chest of bronze.

    Because the thighs and legs are made of Iron and come after the Persian empire, it seems this is another.

    three kings. Note: These were, Cambyses, son of Cyrus; Smerdia the Magian impostor, and Darius Hystaspes. The Ultimate Cross-Reference Treasury

Matthew Henry’s commentary tells us:

He (Gabriel) foretells the reign of four Persian kings (Dan_11:2): Now I will tell thee the truth, that is, the true meaning of the visions of the great image, and of the four beasts, and expound in plain terms what was before represented by dark types. (1.) There shall stand up three kings in Persia, besides Darius, in whose reign this prophecy is dated, Dan_9:1. Mr. Broughton makes these three to be Cyrus, Artaxasta or Artaxerxes, called by the Greeks Cambyses, and Ahasuerus that married Esther called Darius son of Hystaspes. To these three the Persians gave these attributes – Cyrus was a father, Cambyses a master, and Darius a hoarder up. So Herodotus. (2.) There shall be a fourth, far richer than they all, that is, Xerxes, of whose wealth the Greek authors take notice. By his strength (his vast army, consisting of 800,000 men at least) and his riches, with which he maintained and paid that vast army, he stirred up all against the realm of Greece. Xerxes’s expedition against Greece is famous in history, and the shameful defeat that he met with. He who when he went out was the terror of Greece in his return was the scorn of Greece.

With the understanding that we are using Darius as the baseline, Gabriel’s comments logically pertain those who come after Darius. However, we have already seen that God works outside our time frame, and, He has little concern for chronology, and we will see that this also pertains to a distant future; that future is now.

There were several kings of Persia after Xerxes, such as Artaxerxes Longimanus, Darius Nothus, Artaxerxes Mnemon, Ochus, and Darius Codomanus, but these are not enumerated because the real ground of the invasion of Alexander, the thing which connected him with the affairs of Persia, did not occur in their reign, but it was the invasion of Greece by Xerxes. Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Daniel 11:2 “… he will stir up everyone against the kingdom of Greece.”

    • Xerxes did just that.

      The LASB has a comment that is intriguing: “The fourth Persian king may have been Xerxes I (also called Ahasuerus, 486-465 B.C.), who launched an all-out effort against Greece in 480 BC.

      This is the same king we see in the story of Esther.

Esther 1:1 – The following events happened in the days of Ahasuerus. (I am referring to that Ahasuerus who used to rule over a hundred and twenty-seven provinces extending all the way from India to Ethiopia. ) NET Bible

A mighty King, Alexander the Great” Dan 8:21

Daniel 11:3 “And a mighty king will arise, and he will rule with great authority and do as he pleases.

Mighty is the Hebrew word gibbôr which means powerful; by implication warrior, tyrant.
The disconcerting aspect of this word is that it was also used of the Nephaliim. This might imply that Alexander was also a giant.

Daniel 7:6 “After this I kept looking, and behold, another one, like a leopard, which had on its back four wings of a bird; the beast also had four heads, and dominion was given to it.

The beast having four heads is another clue that takes us back to Alexander’s generals which take over after his death.

Focusing on the word dominion.

H7985 – soltan: An Aramaic masculine noun meaning dominion, sovereignty. Most frequently, this noun is used in conjunction with God, showing that He has dominion over everything that exists (Dan_4:3 [3:33]; Dan_4:34 [31]). His dominion is greater than that of a person’s many ways, one being that it is an everlasting dominion that can never be destroyed (Dan_7:14). This noun can also be used of kings (Dan_4:22 [19]). It was used in Daniel’s dream of the four beasts to describe the dominion they have (Dan_7:6, Dan_7:12, Dan_7:26). Much less frequently, this word can be used in the concrete sense of a physical kingdom (Dan_6:26 [27]).

Daniel 8:5-8 While I was observing, behold, a male goat was coming from the west over the surface of the whole earth without touching the ground; and the goat had a conspicuous horn between his eyes. 6) He came up to the ram that had the two horns, which I had seen standing in front of the canal, and rushed at him in his mighty wrath. 7) I saw him come beside the ram, and he was enraged at him; and he struck the ram and shattered his two horns, and the ram had no strength to withstand him. So he hurled him to the ground and trampled on him, and there was none to rescue the ram from his power. 8) Then the male goat magnified himself exceedingly. But as soon as he was mighty, the large horn was broken; and in its place there came up four conspicuous horns toward the four winds of heaven.

Note that none could rescue the ram from his power. The large horn represents Alexander’s reign. Broken, it was replaced by his four generals.

Daniel 8:20-21 “The ram which you saw with the two horns represents the kings of Media and Persia. 21) “The shaggy goat represents the kingdom of Greece, and the large horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

I happen to believe the two horns represent the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires; the last of the Alexandrian empire.

The Division of Alexander’s/Grecian empire into four kingdoms. Dan 8:22

Daniel 11:4 “But as soon as he has arisen, his kingdom will be broken up and parceled out toward the four points of the compass, though not to his own descendants, nor according to his authority which he wielded, for his sovereignty will be uprooted and given to others besides them.

Alexander only ruled for 13 years (336-323BC.)

From Wikipedia: “According to a Babylonian astronomical diary, Alexander died between the evening of June 10 and the evening of June 11, 323 BC, at the age of thirty-two. This happened in the palace of Nebuchadnezzar II in Babylon. Proposed causes of Alexander’s death included alcoholic liver disease, fever, and strychnine poisoning. According to the University of Maryland School of Medicine report of 1998, Alexander probably died of typhoid fever (which, along with malaria, was common in ancient Babylon). In the week before Alexander’s death, historical accounts mention chills, sweats, exhaustion and high fever, typical symptoms of infectious diseases, including typhoid fever. [”https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Alexander_the_Great%5D

Alexander’s kingdom was parceled out to four generals, who were overtaken by Ptolemy to the south and Seleucus in the north.

    • ..though not to his own descendants.”

      From the IVPPBC: “Alexander died in 323BC, at the age of 33; a twenty-year struggle for succession ensued that eventually led to a four-way division of the empire. Two of those divisions were in the Aegean region (Cassander had Greece and Macedonia; Lysimachus had Thrace), while the other two divided up the Near East (Ptolemy had Egypt and Palestine; Seleucus had Syria, Mesopotamia and Persia). The Ptolemaic line is going to be represented by “the king of the South,” while the Seleucid line will be represented by “the king of the North.”