https://www.thetrumpet.com/ A Great Conflict
Daniel 10:10 through 12:4 is the longest single vision in the Bible. God revealed it to Daniel during the third year of the reign of Cyrus the Great (Dan. 10:1)—around 555 b.c. That date alone makes what Daniel wrote in chapter 11 astonishing.
Daniel 10:1 says the vision given to Daniel “was true, but the time appointed was long.” Moffatt translates this better: “the true revelation of a great conflict.” That’s what this prophecy is about—great conflict. Lange’s Commentary entitles this vision of Daniel “great tribulation.” It’s a vision about violence, warfare and bloodshed. And as we shall see, it all revolves around the Middle East.
Let’s pick up the story in verse 14: “Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision is for many days.” “Latter days” means the time just prior to the return of Jesus Christ. Even though much of this prophecy has been fulfilled centuries ago, the main fulfillment of this passage is during the latter days—the time we are living in now.
Verse 1 of chapter 11 is actually a continuation of the thought in chapter 10. We now come to the specifics of this incredible prophecy.
The End of Persia Prophesied
“And now will I show thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia” (v.2). Remember, Daniel received this vision during the third year of Cyrus the Great—the founder of the Medo-Persian Empire. God said there would be four more kings to reign after Cyrus. Actually, there were at least 12 more Persian kings after Cyrus, but there is a reason God only drew attention to the four who followed him.
Cyrus had two sons, Cambyses and Smerdis. After inheriting his father’s throne, Cambyses secretly killed his younger brother Smerdis. Cambyses ruled from 529 to 522 b.c. His reign was short-lived, because after returning to Persia from an Egyptian expedition in 522, he found one by the name of Gomates who had usurped the throne by impersonating Cambyses’ dead brother! Cambyses was so disheartened he committed suicide.
After discovering the imposter, however, Persian nobles rejected him in favor of Darius I, who ruled from 521 to 484 b.c. This third king who followed Cyrus has been called “the second founder of the Persian Empire” because of his empirical expansion efforts and his popular domestic policies.
Darius’ son, Xerxes, inherited the powerful empire his father had built. He was the strongest and richest of all Persian kings, just like it says in Daniel 11:2: “and when he has become strong through his riches, he shall stir up all against the kingdom of Greece” (Revised Standard Version).
Let’s now get historical confirmation of these prophesied events from Myers’ classic volume Ancient History: “After crushing the Egyptian revolt and suppressing another uprising in Babylonia, the Great King [Xerxes] was free to devote his attention to the distant Greeks” (p. 93). Just as Daniel said! Xerxes stirred up his empire against Greece. But it ended in disaster when his naval fleet, as Myers says, was “cut to pieces.” It was the beginning of the end for the Persian Empire, as Myers notes: “The power and supremacy of the Persian monarchy passed away with the reign of Xerxes. The last 140 years of the existence of the empire was a time of weakness and anarchy, which presents nothing that need claim our attention in this place” (ibid.). Note that! After Cyrus, Myers feels that only four other Persian kings are worth mentioning!
As we continue from this remarkable prophecy, you will see that there are just too many historical details revealed in advance for this to be mere coincidence. Verse 3: “And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.” Verse 2 said Xerxes began tangling with Greece. And in verse 3, we read that a mighty Grecian king stood to “rule with great dominion.” His name was Alexander the Great. He arrived in 334 b.c. to crush what remained of the Persians. (It had been in a steady decline for over a hundred years, ever since Xerxes made the mistake of attacking Greece.)
Myers notes that once Alexander slew the weak Persian king, he regarded himself not only as conqueror, but as successor to the Persian throne. This is especially interesting considering what God revealed in Daniel 2 about four world-ruling empires that succeed each other up until Jesus Christ returns to this earth to set up His Kingdom. Alexander’s Grecian Empire was the third of these biblically prophesied world powers. (First was the Chaldean Empire, then Medo-Persia, Greco-Macedonian, and finally the Roman Empire.)
Alexander’s Empire Divided
Continuing in Daniel 11, verse 5: “And when he [Alexander] shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.” Alexander’s reign was cut short in 323 b.c. by his untimely death at age 32. There was no one strong enough to rule the vast expanse of his territory. Thus, his kingdom was divided into four parts, each ruled by one of Alexander’s generals. Myers describes the fragmented state of the empire after Alexander’s death: “Besides minor states, four monarchies rose out of the the ruins. Their rulers were Cassander, Lysimachus, Seleucus Nicator, and Ptolemy, who had each assumed the title of king. The great horn was broken, and instead of it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven” (pp. 286-287). Again, note that! In that last sentence, Myers refers to Daniel 8:8! (Study Daniel 8:2-8, 20-22 as a parallel to Daniel 11:5.) Even Myers can’t help but draw attention to Daniel’s amazingly accurate prophecy, written 200 years before Alexander’s empire was divided among his four generals!
Cassander ruled over Greece and Macedonia and Lysimachus ruled Asia Minor. These two were the weaker of the four generals.
The other two, however, are significant, especially in how they set the stage for two centuries of conflict and struggle in the Middle East. It is these two kingdoms, one north of Jerusalem, the other south, that Daniel 11 primarily focuses on in the next several verses.
Kings of the North and South
Seleucus ended up with Alexander’s far-eastern territory, all the way to India. His western boundary included the region of Syria. He ruled the same general region of ancient Assyria, and also Babylon. “This kingdom,” according to Myers, “during the two centuries and more of its existence, played an important part in the civil history of the world” (p. 290).
Ptolemy captured Egypt, Judea, and part of Syria. This kingdom was perhaps the most important of the four divisions, insofar as its influence upon civilization.
“And the king of the south shall be strong, and one of his princes; and he shall be strong above him, and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion” (v. 5). This verse more specifically explains how the two strongest empires of the four divisions developed. For a while, after Alexander’s death, Ptolemy (Egypt) was the most powerful (“the king of the south shall be strong”). Seleucus Nicator was originally one of Ptolemy’s generals (or “princes”) in Syria. But while Ptolemy was tied up in war after Alexander’s death, Seleucus gained control in the north, founding the dynasty of Seleucidæ in 312 b.c. And as verse 5 says, this dynasty actually exceeded the king of the south in power and might. It was the kingdom of Seleucus that then most closely resembled the great empire under Alexander.
Notice the amazing details God provides in verse 6: “And in the end of years they shall join themselves [or ‘associate themselves’] together; for the king’s daughter of the south shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement….”
After 50 years, this prophecy was fulfilled to the letter. By this time, Antiochus II (called Theos) ruled the northern kingdom in Syria. His wife’s name was Laodice. Largely because of his wife’s influence, Antiochus II was persuaded to initiate war with Ptolemy Philadelphus, king of the south, in 260 b.c. The war was terminated in 252 when, as prophesied, the king of the south’s daughter came to the north to “make an agreement.” Antiochus Theos banished his wife Laodice when Philadelphus offered his daughter Bernice. The two married and both kingdoms temporarily joined themselves together. “But she shall not retain the power of the arm; neither shall he stand, nor his arm…” (v. 6). In other words, though strengthened by that union, neither Antiochus Theos nor Bernice could retain that power.
Continuing from this incredible verse: “But [Bernice] shall be given up, and they that brought her, and he that begat her, and he that strengthened her in these times.” Indeed, after Ptolemy Philadelphus died in 247 b.c., Theos promptly gave up Bernice and retained Laodice as his wife. Still fuming from being banished years earlier, Laodice stayed with Theos long enough to conceive and then promptly murdered her husband, thus securing the throne for her son, Seleucus II. She then tracked down Bernice and assassinated her as well, squelching the last hope of the Ptolemies to have a descendent on the Seleucidæ throne in the north.
The story continues in Daniel 11: “But then shall arise a scion of her [Bernice’s] own family, in succession to his father, who shall head an army to enter the fortress of the king of the north; he shall take action and master the men of the north” (v. 7, Moffatt). The King James translation says one “out of a branch of her roots” would stand and fight against the king of the north. This branch from her own family was none other than Ptolemy III, Bernice’s brother. He invaded Syria in 245 b.c. and quickly avenged his sister’s death by murdering Laodice. Verse 7 was precisely accurate in describing Ptolemy’s victorious conquest. He acquired most all of the Syrian realm, from Cilicia to the Tigris, and besieged “the fortress of the king of the north” in Syria.
Verse 8 says Ptolemy III would carry many captives and spoils back to Egypt, which he did—history confirms more than 2,500 molten images and vessels. God also prophesied that Ptolemy’s reign would continue longer than his counterpart in the north, Seleucus II. God was right again. Ptolemy outlasted him by four years.
“But his [Seleucus’] sons shall be stirred up, and shall assemble a multitude of great forces: and one shall certainly come, and overflow, and pass through: then shall he return, and be stirred up, even to his fortress” (v. 10). The plot thickens! After Seleucus II died, what was left of his kingdom was divided between his two sons, Seleucus III (226-223) and Antiochus III, called “the Great” (223-187). The prophecy in verse 10 quickly narrows its focus to one of these sons, Antiochus III, no doubt because the other died three years into his reign. Verse 10 describes the two expeditions Antiochus led against Egypt. The second one, after 27 years, enabled him to re-capture his fortress, Seleucia.
Verses 11-12 prophesied that the young Egyptian king, Ptolemy IV (Philopater), would not wallow in defeat: “In a fit of mad rage the king of the south shall march out to fight the king of the north, who shall raise a large army, but it shall fall into the hands of his foe and be taken prisoner, to the proud joy of the king of the south, who shall rout tens of thousands of them” (Moffatt).
Once again, Egypt gained control of Judea, but only for a short time. Verse 13 foretold another resurgence by the king of the north in this see-saw battle over the Middle East. It says after “certain years” (actually it was 12 years, bringing us to 205 b.c.), Antiochus III returned with greater riches and a bigger army. Antiochus garnered military support from Philip of Macedonia and others. Jewish historian Josephus says many Jews helped in this fight against Egypt.
Now consider how accurately God foretold of this anti-Egyptian alliance hundreds of years in advance: “And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south…” (v. 14). Indeed, Daniel 11 is an astonishing prophecy! The next time someone tries to cast aside the Bible as flawed and uninspired, have them try to explain away this prophecy!
The next several verses give more details concerning Antiochus the Great’s conquests. Verse 15 says he would come upon Egypt and “take the most fenced cities,” a probable reference to Antiochus’ capture of Sidon. Verse 16 says “he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed.” The “glorious land” refers to the land of Judea. After Antiochus captured Sidon, he defeated Egypt atMount Panium in 198 b.c. and assumed control of Judea. This fulfilled prophecy is important because it sets the stage for a latter-day prophecy discussed at the end of Daniel 11, which will again revolve around the glorious land.
In verse 17, Daniel wrote, “He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom….” Antiochus’ success in Phoenicia, Syria and Judea prompted him to go after the “whole kingdom,” meaning Egypt. Verse 17 continues, “And he shall give him the daughter of women, corrupting her: but she shall not stand on his side, neither be for him.” After his military venture into Egypt in 198 b.c., Antiochus the Great offered his daughter Cleopatra (not the Egyptian queen of 31 b.c.) to the young Ptolemy, hoping to gain complete possession of Egypt. It didn’t work, as verse 17 verifies. Cleopatra knew she was only being offered as bait. She betrayed her father and gave her full support to her new husband, the king of Egypt.
Antiochus focused his energies elsewhere. “Thereafter he shall turn to the coastlands of the West [off Asia Minor] and capture many of them, but a certain Roman general shall put a stop to his defiant insults and pay him back for them” (v. 18, Moffatt). By this time, the Romans were beginning their ascension to world rule. The young Roman general mentioned in this scripture is Lucius Scipio Asiaticus. He crushed Antiochus’ forces in the Battle of Magnesia in 190 b.c.
Tail between his legs, Antiochus III returned to his own land (v. 19). He died in 187 b.c.
“Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom: but within few days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle” (v. 20). Antiochus was succeeded by his son Seleucus Philopator (187-176). As the scripture notes, he was famous for collecting taxes. He sent a tax collector by the name of Heliodorus throughout Judea, hoping to raise money for the waning empire. The scripture says his reign would be short-lived and that he would not die in anger or battle. History confirms that his brief, 11-year reign was cut short by his tax-collector Heliodorus, who poisoned him.
Since Seleucus left no heir, the other son of Antiochus the Great was left to wrest control of the empire from Heliodorus. The other son was called Epiphanes (Antiochus IV).
Thus we reach a critical turn in the Daniel 11 story. Antiochus Epiphanes was responsible for setting up the abomination of desolation. This is significant because of a prophecy
concerning an end-time abomination of desolation (Matt. 24:15; Luke 21:20). (There is also a spiritual dimension to this story because it revolved around the temple anciently. Today, in this end time, the Church is that temple; Eph. 2:21.)
Antiochus Epiphanes
Antiochus Epiphanes was a ruthless dictator who obtained rule through deceitful lies and flatteries. Verse 21 of Daniel 11 said he would “come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.” Rawlinson gives the historical account of this event in his authoritative Manual of Ancient History: “Antiochus, assisted by Eumenes, drives out Heliodorus, and obtains the throne, b.c. 176. He astonishes his subjects by an affectation of Roman manners.” Antiochus Epiphanes gained control by pretending to be someone he really wasn’t.
Continue in verse 22: “The opposing forces shall be swept before him and shattered, and so shall God’s high priest” (Moffatt). In this verse, we begin to see how much Antiochus hated the Jews. Rulers before him had typically treated the Jews well. But Antiochus Epiphanes’ ruthlessness toward the Jews far surpassed that of his fathers’ (v. 24). Verse 22 says Antiochus would even go so far as to murder the Jewish high priest. History confirms that Onias III was high priest in Judea at the time, and that Antiochus put him to death in 172 b.c. According to Rawlinson, Jews “were driven to desperation by the mad project of this self-willed monarch.”
In 168 b.c., Antiochus pillaged and desecrated the Jews’ temple in Jerusalem. Greek historian Polybius observed that he “despoiled most sanctuaries.” He also burdened the Jews with unbearable taxes. “Throughout the turbulent changes of its past history,” Werner Keller writes in The Bible as History, “Israel had been spared none of the horror and ignominy which could befall a nation. But never before, neither under the Assyrians nor under the Babylonians, had it received such a blow as the edict issued by Antiochus Epiphanes by which he hoped to crush and destroy the faith of Israel” (p. 331; see also I Maccabees 1:44). Much of this struggle between the Jews and the Syrian Kingdom is recorded in the book of Maccabees (in the Hebrew Bible).
Verse 23 shows that even though this vile human being only had a few supporters at the outset, he eventually gained a large following through deceit and flatteries.
Verse 24: “He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province; and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers’ fathers; he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches: yea, and he shall forecast his devices against the strong holds, even for a time.” In this end time, we will witness another force that enters into the Holy Land “peaceably.” But like Antiochus, the leader of this end-time, peace-keeping force will not really want peace.
Verse 25 tells of another great clash between Epiphanes and the king of the south. It was his second successful Egyptian campaign. This clash revolved around Jerusalem. Verse 27 says both kings were mischievous and lied to each other.
On his return from Egypt, Antiochus encountered another Maccabean insurrection. Verse 28 reveals that his heart was against the “holy covenant.” “He shall do exploits” means Antiochus just did as he pleased against the Jews. He massacred them.
In verse 29, God prophesied of a third campaign into Egypt. But this one did not go well for Antiochus. Verse 30 says the “ships of Chittim” came against him. He was cut off by a Roman fleet from Cyprus. Defeated and dejected, Antiochus returned to the land of Judea and took his frustration out on the Jews. Verse 30 says he again had “indignation against the holy covenant”—God’s people. Then it says he had intelligence with a disloyal contingent of God’s people. In other words, he was plotting deceitfully with people inside the temple.
Verse 31: “And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.” Here we find the Bible’s first reference to the abomination of desolation. Consider the scene as Daniel describes it. Moffatt says “armed forces shall be set on foot by” Antiochus. It is talking about an army in Jerusalem. This army is what makes Jerusalem desolate. It desecrates the holy place and takes away the daily sacrifice (see also Dan. 8:11, 24). This happened in 167 b.c. Tradition says that Antiochus built a statue of Jupiter Olympus in the holy of holies—the holiest place inside the temple. He tried to stamp out the Jewish religion altogether.
