Daniel 11:1–35

We have a quick survey of what was about to happen to Israel in the last days. The speaker here is the same as in Daniel 10. Three more kings are still to rise in Persia. There we have the line of Persian rulers after Cyrus. Scripture does show us who these were, although their names are not given here.

The angel sent to Daniel had already been used to confirm and strengthen Darius the Mede. This may throw great light on why Darius was so kind to Daniel. Daniel 6 gives us the outward history. Daniel 10 and Daniel 11:1 show us the spiritual conflict behind that history. We now learn that the hostility of Daniel's enemies came out of spiritual wickedness working behind the scenes. In the same way, the favour Darius showed Daniel came from God's angelic messenger, who confirmed and strengthened the king. Neither Daniel's enemies nor his friends knew that these spiritual beings were at work.

Anyone reading Daniel 6 is struck by how eagerly Darius took up Daniel's cause, and how he tried to save him from the schemes of his enemies. The secret behind it is now uncovered. It shows that God holds the hearts of all men in His hands, and turns them wherever He wills to carry out His purposes… Darius did not know it. But we are now told that a divine influence was working in secret. It confirmed him in a certain course and strengthened him against those who were plotting against God's witness in the king's court. Let us learn from this to look away from all lesser causes. We can rest in this: God is working in silence towards the end He has set, through all the apparent confusion of human plans, and in the face of all the power the enemy has shown.

This is very instructive to us, for God always governs the world. While the throne of God was at Jerusalem, He governed the world directly — not only Israel but the world, and this according to the good or bad conduct of Israel. After that He did not stop governing everywhere. But already in this book, with Israel in captivity, He is acting by the secret springs of His providence. He is not acting by the direct working of the revealed rule of His law, as He did among His people.

The angels are mentioned here in connection with God's providence. Angels are the great instruments of providence, and God carries out His unseen working through them.

Daniel 11 gives us the most extraordinary and detailed prophecy in the whole Word of God. It prophesies the reigns of kings, royal marriages, wars, victories, defeats, plots, treaties and assassinations. This is striking and unanswerable evidence that God knows the future. Who but God could write down such detailed prophecies? They have all come true except one. That one exception is still future, and it will certainly come to pass.

The opening verses of chapter 11, and indeed most of the chapter, give us predictions that were clearly fulfilled long ago… Only when we reach verse 36 does the prophecy move on to the time of the end, and to the last days.

We have a rapid survey of what was about to befall Israel in the latter days. It is the same speaker here as in Daniel 10... There we have the succession of Persian monarchs from Cyrus. Scripture does show us who these were, although their names are not mentioned here. I would refer you to Ezra 4, where these very three kings are mentioned.

First we have Ahasuerus, the unworthy son of a great father, here (Ezra 4:6) called Ahasuerus, or Cambyses as he is named in ordinary history... Darius Hystaspes became king through the revolt that set aside the false Smerdis; and he is the king of Persia who confirmed the decree of Cyrus... This Darius Hystaspes is the third in Daniel 11:2 — that is, the third after Cyrus the Great.

This famously rich king of Persia was Xerxes, who tried to follow his father's hostility to Athens... How exact and terse is the prophet's sketch! "When he has become strong through his riches." It was not skill or force of arms, but wealth that gathered his vast armies of foreign troops. But his enormous armies, far greater than those of his father Darius, were useless... While they pushed their territory through Western Asia, God in His providence was with them. But when they reached for the sea and Europe by rushing into Greece, they laid the foundation of the hostility that later broke out in Alexander the Great.

This confirms a point made earlier: the goat rushed against Persia with such fury in return for the Persian attack on Greece. Xerxes was the man who made that great attempt. His riches are famous, and no event made so deep an impression on the world of that day as that expedition against Greece and its consequences.

Four kings of Persia were still to arise, and "a fourth shall be far richer than all of them." Ezra 4 mentions the first three: Ahasuerus, Artaxerxes, and Darius. The fourth was the famous Xerxes, who became "strong through his riches" and stirred up "all against the kingdom of Greece." The prophecy passes over the overwhelming defeat of his mixed army, and the later invasion and conquest of his kingdom by Alexander. These are facts well known to every reader of history, and Daniel 8:7 alludes to them.

Daniel 11 gives us the most extraordinary and detailed prophecy in the whole Word of God. When we remember that it prophesies the reigns of kings, royal marriages, wars, victories, defeats, plots, treaties and assassinations, it gives striking and unanswerable evidence of divine foreknowledge. For who but God could write down such detailed prophecies, which have come true with one exception? The one exception is still future, and awaits a fulfilment that will surely come to pass.

Even the sceptical Gibbon says: "The four empires are clearly outlined: the expedition of Xerxes into Greece, the rapid conquest of Persia by Alexander, his early death without descendants, the division of his vast monarchy into four kingdoms... Daniel's prophecies describe all this as plainly as the histories of Justin and Diodorus. From such a perfect resemblance the clever unbeliever would infer that both were alike composed after the event." In a word, he was too exact for a prophet, and too fabulous for a contemporary historian.

In verse 3, Persia, the ram of Daniel 8, drops out, and we find the he-goat of that chapter, or more exactly its horn… This is Alexander.

Every reader of history knows the crushing defeat of Xerxes' mixed army, and Alexander's later invasion and conquest of his kingdom. Daniel 8:7 refers to it. Verse 3 passes it over, and Alexander, as a "mighty king," is brought in at once.

His campaigns moved at striking speed, and the vision describes it well: "a male goat came from the west across the face of the whole earth, without touching the ground." In about ten years he conquered almost all the kingdoms of the then known world… By God's appointment the Persian empire had reached its end, and the kingdom He had destined to follow it was now to gain the supremacy. The battles of Issus and Arbela were decisive because God was using Alexander "the Great" to carry out His purposes for the government of the earth.

When God speaks of things upon the earth, He always measures from Israel, because Israel is His earthly centre.

Daniel had described, in few words, the character of the "mighty king" and the break-up of his kingdom, "divided toward the four winds of heaven" (Dan. 11:3). This was an event of great political importance to Judea. The land found itself fought over by the king of the South, Egypt, and the king of the North, Syria — and it will be so again in a later day.

Our chapter is historical — the only really and truly historical prophecy in the word of God. Though there are breaks in the history, the main features are given here more clearly than by any human historian writing later.

The four empires stand out clearly: the expedition of Xerxes into Greece; the rapid conquest of Persia by Alexander; his early death without descendants; the division of his monarchy into four kingdoms, one of which, Egypt, is named… All of it is as clear as the histories of Justin and Diodorus. From so perfect a likeness the crafty unbeliever would conclude that both alike were written after the event.

Verses 36-39 predict what this "king" will do, and the leading feature is this: he "shall do as he wills." Now sin is lawlessness. It is the creature breaking loose from the control of the Creator, to assert and carry out its own will.

Alexander crossed most of Asia and pushed as far as India. He proved his ability not only as a general but as the founder of a solid empire. But God laid His hand upon him.

Alexander did indeed come from the west like one whose feet never touched the ground. In the fury of his power he ran at the Persian empire, which until then had been mighty and had pushed west, north, and south. Yet in the strangest and saddest way Alexander's course was cut short. He died as a young man of thirty-two, in the middle of plans that reached far beyond those of all who went before him. And his generals began, as they often do, to fight one another over which of them should have the largest share of the broken Macedonian or Greek empire, since one man could not inherit it all.

Daniel tells us also that the leopard had four heads. These, as Daniel 8:8-22 and 11:4 tell us, are the four military leaders — not Alexander's descendants — who divided his dominions among themselves after his death. Their names were Seleucus, Ptolemy, Cassander, and Lysimachus.

Then we learn, as earlier visions already showed, that Alexander's dominion would be split into four distinct kingdoms. These would not descend to his posterity; strangers would rule them. We know all this came true when four of Alexander's generals divided his dominion between them.

History records how brief Alexander's dominion was. He died when still young, and four of his generals divided his kingdom between them, just as verse 4 clearly foretells. Their powers, however, were far more limited and "not according to his dominion."

It was not to be a single head getting rid of the family of Alexander and taking possession of all. His kingdom was to be divided into several parts, four in particular; and out of these four divisions two acquire an immense importance. But what makes them so important here? When God speaks of things on the earth, He always measures from Israel, because Israel is His earthly centre.

From verse 5 onward we follow the doings of two of these four: the king of the south and the king of the north. If we ask why the prophecy concentrates on these two only, the answer surely is that only these two meddled with and oppressed the Jews back in the land. Their kingdoms were north and south of Palestine — what we should now call Syria and Egypt — and the first kings were Seleucus and Ptolemy.

Gibbon, the sceptical historian, says in his sneering way that Daniel "is too exact for a prophet." "The four empires are clearly outlined ... Alexander's untimely death without descendants; the division of his monarchy into four kingdoms, one of which, Egypt, is mentioned by name... From such a perfect resemblance the clever unbeliever would infer that both alike were composed after the event."

The devout believer in the inspired word of God will not need to be told that this is an accurate description in every detail of what took place at the death of Alexander. It is so accurate, indeed, that the unbeliever can only account for it by claiming it was written after the event! ... And who is the loser? Surely the man who, in the pride of his imagined self-sufficiency, shuts his eyes against the light.

Now we are told that "the king of the south shall be strong." He is the person well known as one of the Ptolemies, or Lagidae. Then comes "one of his princes" — that is, one of Alexander's chiefs — "and he shall be strong above him, and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion." This is another person: the first king of the north, who rises in strength above Ptolemy. Secular history calls him Seleucus.

There is no need to discuss the translation. It is enough to say that most take this sentence to apply to the king of the north. Here we have the founders of the two dynasties: Ptolemy and Seleucus, two of the four who succeeded to Alexander's kingdom.

We must remember, if we want to understand this prophecy, that even the geography of Scripture is always measured from the position of the Holy Land. A king of the south is a king to the south of Palestine. Palestine is the centre of all God's thoughts about the government of this world. Jerusalem is His chosen city.

The prophecy that follows calls the rulers of these kingdoms the king of the south, or Egypt, and the king of the north, or Syria. These titles do not always refer to the same person. They serve as official titles for kings of the same line.

Scripture gives them in such detail because of what they meant for the Jews and the glorious land… As the two hostile countries invaded each other, their armies marched again and again through the land. Judea belonged to whichever king had won at the moment… God could not be indifferent to this, for it touched the welfare of His poor people who had returned from Babylon. That is why the Spirit of God has had the account of all these wars written down. It shows us the intensity of God's love for His people, whatever their state.

In the third century the pagan Porphyry made a bitter attack on the belief that Daniel wrote these predictions. He made it in his book "Treatise against Christians." He argued that someone wrote it all after the events had taken place. The critics use the same arguments… The prophecies given here came true in exact detail during the years 301 B.C. to 168 B.C. History verifies everything.

Daniel 11:1-35 is a history of the wars between the king of the north (Syria) and the king of the south (Egypt). Both were branches of the Greek empire. The fighting often took place in Palestine, which lay between them… Daniel 11:21 to 35 refer to Antiochus Epiphanes. He is a type of the king of the north, the Assyrian of the last days.

The other kingdoms are not noticed, only those of the north and of the south. Why are they so described? Palestine is the place from which God reckons. The king of the north means north of the land that His eyes were upon. The southern power means south of that same land. These are the countries commonly called Syria and Egypt.

In this chapter we do not have the same king of the north all the way through, nor the same king of the south. We have a great many who follow one another. The same official title runs throughout. As people say in law, the king, or the queen, never dies. That is how we are to look at it here. This sixth verse is an instance… These are not the same kings of the north and south as in verse 5. They are their descendants.

The expression in verse 6, "in the end of years," shows that time passes. And in fact Seleucus's grandson, Antiochus II, carried out a treaty of peace with Ptolemy Philadelphus. Antiochus confirmed it by marrying Ptolemy's daughter, Bernice. In order to do this he repudiated his lawful wife, Laodike.

Antiochus II was at war with Ptolemy. Peace came on one condition: he must put away his wife Laodice and marry Berenice, the daughter of Ptolemy. He did this. But when Philadelphus died, he took Laodice back. She feared another divorce, so she poisoned her husband. Then she caused the death of Berenice and her son.

This queen, Berenice, was murdered, and so were her husband (the king of the north), her son, and her attendants. In this way the plan meant to bring friendship became the ground of future quarrels and conflicts. The next three verses (7-9) describe how the murder of Berenice was avenged. One out of a branch of her "roots" — another king of the south — invaded Syria, entered "into the fortress of the king of the north," and prevailed.

But God never allowed rest to those who took His land. They might intermarry and make alliances, but it only proved the prelude to worse outbreaks — brothers, sons and grandsons taking up the quarrels of their family.

These wars are told in such detail because of what they meant for the Jews and the glorious land… It lay between them, and so formed the highway of approach from either country. So the armies of the two hostile countries kept marching through the land as they invaded each other… God could not be indifferent to this, for it affected the welfare of His poor people who had returned from Babylon. That is why the Spirit of God had the account of all these wars written down. It shows us the intensity of God's love for His people, whatever their state. It also teaches us that He sees the movements of nations as affecting His people's interests.

Daniel 11 gives us the most extraordinary and detailed prophecy in the whole Word of God. It foretells the reigns of kings, royal marriages, wars, victories, defeats, plots, treaties and assassinations. Remember that, and you have striking and unanswerable evidence of divine foreknowledge. For who but God could write down such detailed prophecies? They have all come true except one. That one is still future, and it waits for a fulfilment that will surely come.

In verse 6, after a gap of time, we hear of an effort to patch up an old jealousy. From the earliest days these powers had quarrelled over the land that lay between them. Ptolemy Philadelphus gave his daughter Berenice to Antiochus Theus. But Laodice, the wronged first wife, brought it all to nothing and made things worse than ever. She won back the northern king's favour, and then she poisoned those from the south, along with her husband and Berenice's son.

Then we read that a branch out of her roots shall come with an army against the King of the North and prevail. This came true when Bernice's brother, Ptolemy III Euergetes, marched north to avenge the murder of his sister.

It was not her child, but her brother — out of the same parental stock. She was one branch, and he another.

The next three verses (7-9) describe the avenging of Berenice's murder. The avenger came out of a branch of her "roots" — another king of the south. He invaded Syria, entered "into the fortress of the king of the north," and prevailed (v. 7). In fact his victory was complete. He carried his conquests as far as Antioch, and eastward to Babylon, and returned to Egypt in triumph with great spoil of gods and treasures.

In this chapter the king of the north is not one man all the way through, and neither is the king of the south. Many kings follow one after another. The same official title runs throughout. As people say in law, the king, or the queen, never dies. That is just the way we are to look at it here.

The king of the north means the king north of the land that His eyes were upon. The southern power means south of that same land. These are the countries we usually call Syria and Egypt.

These conflicts are given in such detail because of their bearing on the Jews and the glorious land... The land lay between them, and so formed the highway of approach from either country. When the two hostile countries invaded each other, their armies marched again and again through it... God could not be indifferent to this, since it touched the welfare of His poor people who had returned from Babylon. That is why the Spirit of God has had the account of all these wars written down. It shows us the intensity of God's love for His people, whatever their state.

Daniel 11 gives us the most extraordinary and detailed prophecy in the whole Word of God. It foretells the reigns of kings, royal marriages, wars, victories, defeats, plots, treaties and assassinations. Remember that, and you have striking and unanswerable evidence that God knows the future. For who but God could write down such detailed prophecies, and all have come true but one? That one is still future, and it awaits a fulfilment that is certain to come.

The next three verses (7-9) tell how another king of the south avenged the murder of Berenice. He came out of a branch of her "roots." He invaded Syria, entered "into the fortress of the king of the north," and prevailed (v. 7). In fact his victory was complete. He pushed his conquests as far as Antioch, and eastward to Babylon, and returned to Egypt in triumph with great spoil of gods and treasures, as verse 8 recounts.

Reports say the booty consisted of 40,000 talents of silver and 2,500 precious vessels of gold and silver. The images of the gods that Cambyses had captured earlier were also recovered and put back with great ceremony in the pagan temples.

This reference to Egypt is interesting as a fresh proof of the geographical position of the Kingdom of the South.

In this chapter we do not have the same king of the north, or the same king of the south, all the way through. There are a great many of them, and each one follows the last. The same official title runs right through. As people say in law, the king, or the queen, never dies. That is just how we are to look at it here.

From verse 5 onward the chapter turns to two of these four kings: the king of the south and the king of the north. Why does the prophecy focus on these two alone? Because only these two interfered with the Jews back in the land and oppressed them. Their kingdoms lay north and south of Palestine — what we would now call Syria and Egypt — and the first kings were Seleucus and Ptolemy.

It becomes clear that when God records events in the Gentile world, He does so only so far as those events concern His people and "the glorious land."

The land of Israel lay between them. It was a heavy burden to these kings, who made it their battlefield, and it always went to the winner. If the king of the north won, the land fell under Syria; and it was the same when the king of Egypt came out on top. But God never allowed rest to those who took His land.

We read that the King of the South would continue more years than the King of the North. He lived four or five years longer than his rival, Seleucus Kallinicus.

The four empires are clearly marked out: the expedition of Xerxes into Greece; the rapid conquest of Persia by Alexander; his early death without children; the division of his monarchy into four kingdoms, one of which, Egypt, is named outright; then various wars and marriages between the families ... all described as clearly as in the histories of Justin and Diodorus. From such a perfect likeness the crafty unbeliever would conclude that both were written after the event.

You must read the terms "king of the north" and "king of the south" in relation to the land of Palestine. Egypt lay to the south. Greco-Syria (modern Asian Turkey) lay to the north. The kings named here belong to two lines, the Ptolemies and the Seleucids.

In this chapter we do not have the same king of the north all the way through, nor the same king of the south. There are a great many kings who follow one another. The same official title runs throughout. As people say in law, The king, or the queen never dies. That is just the way we are to look at it here.

The next three verses (7-9) describe how another king of the south avenged the murder of Berenice. He came out of a branch of her "roots." He invaded Syria, entered "into the fortress of the king of the north," and prevailed (v. 7). In fact his victory was complete. He carried his conquests as far as Antioch, and eastwards to Babylon, and returned to Egypt in triumph with great spoil of gods and treasures, as verse 8 recounts.

Here we see Ptolemy Euergetes and his victories over Seleucus Callinicus, who later came against the kingdom of the south (Egypt).

Scripture gives them in such detail because of what they meant for the Jews and the glorious land... The land lay between the two powers, so it became the road by which each could reach the other. As the two hostile countries invaded each other, their armies marched through it again and again... God could not be indifferent to this, because it touched the welfare of His poor people who had come back from Babylon. That is why the Spirit of God had the account of all these wars written down. It shows us how deep God's love for His people is, whatever their state. It also teaches us that He watches the movements of nations as they affect His people's interests.

These kings made the land of Israel their battlefield, and it always went to the winner. But God never allowed rest to those who took His land.

In his "Treatise against Christians" the pagan Porphyry, in the third century, fiercely attacked the belief that Daniel wrote these predictions. He argued that someone wrote it all after the events had happened. The critics use the same arguments... These prophecies came true in exact detail in the years 301 B.C. to 168 B.C. History verifies everything.

The context makes it plain that the term "his sons," in verse 10, applies to the successors of the king of the north who had been overcome by Ptolemy III. And in fact the next two kings of the north did attack Egypt with large forces, but they failed. The second of the two suffered a crushing defeat.

This was fulfilled when Seleucus's two sons, Alexander and Antiochus, succeeded their father. Antiochus was later called the Great, and he was the third of the line to bear that name. Alexander died, it is said, by poison. That left the field to Antiochus, who defeated the King of the South several times.

In this chapter the king of the north is not one man all the way through, and neither is the king of the south. There are a great many of them, one after another. The same official title runs throughout. As people say in law, the king, or the queen never dies. That is just the way we are to look at it here.

In due time the sons of the king of the north would seek to avenge their defeat. They would assemble a great army and pass through the holy land to attack the king of the south. Moved with rage, the king of the south would come forth to meet this attack and seek to crush his opponents. Yet even his crushing victory would not make him safe, and it would not end these conflicts.

They are given in such detail because of what they meant for the Jews and the glorious land... The land lay between Syria and Egypt, so it formed the road of approach from either country. As the two enemy countries invaded each other, their armies marched through it again and again... God could not be indifferent to this, for it affected the welfare of His poor people who had returned from Babylon. That is why the Spirit of God has had the account of all these wars written down. It shows us the intensity of God's love for His people, whatever their state.

The land of Israel lay between them, and these kings made it their battlefield. It always went to the conqueror... But God never allowed rest to those who took His land.

Antiochus did on a small scale what the great northern king of the last days will do on a larger one... What we have seen shows us something. Elsewhere God may give only the general outline of events. But in the details of a prophecy He can be, and sometimes is, remarkably exact. Nowhere is He more so than in this very chapter. And what is the main objection unbelievers raise against it? That it must have been written after the events happened! One thing is certain: no historian since those times gives us as fine an account as we have in these few verses.

In this chapter it is not the same king of the north, nor the same king of the south, that we have all the way through, but a great many that succeed each other. The same official title runs throughout. As people say in law, the king, or the queen never dies. That is just the way we are to look at it here.

In verse 10 we have the attempts of Seleucus Ceraunus and Antiochus the Great against the south. Only the second of them, Antiochus, recovered Seleucia. So even Ptolemy Philopator, sluggish as he was, grew enraged (verse 11). Then Antiochus, after some successes, suffered a total rout at Raphia (verse 12).

"But his sons shall be stirred up" clearly refers to the sons of the King of the North, as the reference in verse 11 to the King of the South fighting the King of the North proves.

the next two kings of the north did attack Egypt with large forces, but they failed. The second of them suffered a disastrous defeat, just as verse 11 predicted: "the multitude [the army of the king of the north] shall be given into his hand" — that is, into the hand of the king of the south, Egypt.

Moved with rage, the king of the south would come out to meet this attack and try to crush his opponents. Still, his overwhelming victory would not make him safe, and it would not end these conflicts.

The Egyptian King fulfilled verse 11 of our chapter by finally defeating Antiochus decisively, but he was not strengthened by it, as verse 12 states, for he gave himself up to excesses and debauchery, and eventually made peace with Antiochus.

Scripture gives these wars in such detail because of what they meant for the Jews and for the glorious land… The land lay between the two kingdoms, so it became the road of approach from either country… God could not be indifferent to this, for it touched the welfare of His poor people who had returned from Babylon. That is why the Spirit of God has had the account of all these wars recorded. It shows us how strong God's love for His people is, whatever their state. It also teaches us that He watches the movements of nations as they affect His people's interests.

Daniel 11 gives us the most extraordinary and detailed prophecy in the whole Word of God. It foretells the reigns of kings, royal marriages, wars, victories, defeats, plots, treaties, and assassinations. Remember that, and it is very striking, unanswerable evidence that God knows the future.

As we read in verse 12, the king of Egypt gained nothing from his victory, because his heart was proud. Although he struck down tens of thousands, that did not make him strong. Verse 13 gives the reason.

Antiochus had various successes, then suffered a crushing defeat at Raphia (Dan. 11:12). But no lasting gain came to the Egyptian king, especially as he oppressed the Jews. Meanwhile Antiochus waited until he could fall on his infant nephew when the Jews revolted (Dan. 11:13-14).

Antiochus, thirteen years later, returned with an army greater than ever, so fulfilling verse 13. He also gained allies, in particular Macedonia and Jews who had turned away from God.

I believe "times" always means literal years. Daniel 4:32 says, "seven times shall pass over you," and the margin of Daniel 11:13 says, "at the end of times, even years." In these cases the term certainly means literal years, not "prophetic" years… So the period of antichrist's full power will be very short, and it will fall at the time of the final crisis.

Not even in Daniel 11:13 can anyone draw out such a prophetic sense. The word "years" explains "at the end of times," and "years" in the ordinary sense. This surely confirms that we take Daniel 12:7-12 in the same sense.

These wars are told in such detail because of what they meant for the Jews and the glorious land… Palestine lay between Syria and Egypt, so it formed the highway of approach from either country… God could not be indifferent to this, because it touched the welfare of His poor people who had returned from Babylon. That is why the Spirit of God has caused the account of all these wars to be recorded. It shows us how intense God's love is for His people, whatever their state. It also teaches us that He watches the movements of nations as they affect His people's interests.

What is the main objection raised by unbelievers against it? That it must have been written after the events had taken place! It is certain that no historian since those times gives us such a fine account as we have in these few verses. If I want to know the history of these two rival kingdoms, Syria and Egypt, I must look here. How completely we can trust the word of God about everything!

Daniel 11:1-35 are a history of the contests between the king of the north (Syria) and the king of the south (Egypt) — branches of the Greek empire… Daniel 11:21-35 refer to Antiochus Epiphanes, a picture of the king of the north, or Assyrian of the last days.

Again the king of the north would return to the attack with a yet greater army. Moreover, many others would join in this attack on the king of the south. Further, Daniel learns that rebels among his own people — the Jews, here called the "violent" — would seek to exalt themselves. They would do it by joining this alliance against the king of the south.

Allow me to call attention to these words. It at once settles the question that might be asked — How do you know that Daniel's people do not mean God's people in a spiritual sense? The answer is given here — "the robbers of your people." This at once puts aside the plea for a spiritual sense. We could hardly talk about "robbers" in that case. This confirms what ought not to have needed further evidence — that Daniel's people mean the Jewish people, and nothing else.

From the first, one solemn fact stands out. The Jews are for the present Lo-ammi (not My people). God no longer addresses them through the prophet. They are called Daniel's people in Dan. 9:24, Dan. 10:14, Dan. 11:14, Dan. 12:1; and God bears the distinct title "the God of the heavens."

All this, it hardly needs saying, happened just so. Antiochus the Great and Philip III of Macedonia formed a league with others against Egypt. At the same time many of the Jewish rebels and self-declared patriots, "the robbers of your people," threw off their loyalty to Egypt.

Another group is named: "the robbers of your people" — that is, of Daniel's people. They "exalt themselves to establish the vision," to prove God's word true, "but they shall fall."

These are called "the robbers of your people." They take the part of Antiochus, the king of the north, against Ptolemy Philopator, or rather his son; but it all came to nothing. The Syrian king might hope that, by bringing in this new element, by winning the support of the Jews, perhaps God would be with him. But no. They were the robbers of the people — unfaithful to God, and not holding fast their separation from the nations. They too might think to establish the vision, "but they shall fall."

The old nature can become religious and adapt itself outwardly to the ways of God. What we see far off suits our own inclinations. So we set up religious activity to establish the vision (Dan. 11:14) or to bring about the blessing. But the effect is only to delay and obstruct real blessing; for God will not use it. Discipline is painful and humiliating at the time. Yet it is God's way of preserving and preparing the soul for the future blessing.

When God speaks of things on the earth, He always measures from Israel, because Israel is His earthly centre. The powers that interfere with Israel are the ones that matter in God's view. This is why the other kingdoms are not mentioned — only those of the north and of the south. And why are they described this way? Palestine is the place from which God reckons. The king of the north means north of the land that His eyes were upon. The southern power means south of that same land. These are the countries commonly called Syria and Egypt.

In this chapter the king of the north is not one man all the way through, and neither is the king of the south. A great many rulers succeed each other. The same official title runs throughout. As people say in law, the king, or the queen, never dies. That is just how we are to look at it here.

All this, it hardly needs saying, happened exactly. Antiochus the Great and Philip III of Macedonia formed a league with others against Egypt. At the same time many of the Jewish rebels and self-proclaimed patriots, "the robbers of your people," threw off their allegiance to Egypt. The next verse (15) states the result of this combination against the king of the south. Antiochus and his allies conquered "the most fortified cities." They took possession of the whole of Judea, and they crushed the Egyptian army.

He took Sidon (Dan. 11:15), despite everything Egypt could do to stop him — Egypt was defeated at Panium.

In the course of this conflict the king of the north would take the fortified cities in the land of Israel, and the glorious land would come under his power. The forces of the king of the south would be unable to stop the conquest of the glorious land.

The land of Israel lay between them, and it was a kind of heavy burden to these kings who made it their battlefield. It always went to the conqueror. But God never allowed rest to those who took His land.

Another remarkable thing we see here is that the Spirit of God still holds to the importance of that little strip of land — the territory of Palestine. It was God's gift to God's people. However ruined its condition may be, it is the glorious land still. God does not change His purposes: "He will yet choose Israel, and set them in their own land." He holds to His earthly purposes despite every hindrance. What then will He not do for His heavenly people?

Elsewhere God may give only the general outline of events. But what we have seen shows that He can be, and sometimes is, exact in the smallest details of a prophecy. Nowhere is He more so than in this very chapter. And what is the main objection raised by unbelievers against it? That it must have been written after the events took place! Certainly no historian since those times gives us such an admirable account as we have in these few verses. If I want to know the history of these two rival monarchies, Syria and Egypt, I must look here. How completely we can trust the word of God about everything!

Antiochus and his allies captured "the most fortified cities," took possession of the whole of Judea, and crushed the Egyptian army. So he did according to his own will, and no one was able to stand before him (v. 16). Then it is said, "He shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed."

There was good reason in God's eyes to give at this point an account of the kings north and south of Palestine, and of their struggles and alliances with each other... We have these movements traced with precision. Nothing in history can be more exact. Name, if you can, any great writer of that time who gives facts with as much accuracy, simplicity, and clearness as this chapter.

The Hebrew word "kahlah" occurs 22 times, and English translations render it in various ways. Isaiah uses it twice only (Isa. 10:23; Isa. 28:22, "consumption"), and so also Daniel (Dan. 9:27, "consummation"; Dan. 11:16, "which... shall be consumed," literally "and destruction" in his hand).

Some hold that the word "consumed" should be "perfected." It does seem settled that the king of the north acted on this occasion as a friend to the Jews, and helped with the completion or beautifying of the temple.

Here is another remarkable thing. The Spirit of God still holds to the importance of that little strip of land — the territory of Palestine. It was God's gift to God's people. However bad its condition may be, it is the glorious land still. God does not change His mind about His purposes: "He will yet choose Israel, and set them in their own land." If He holds like this to His purposes for the earth, despite every hindrance, what will He not do for His heavenly people?

"The glorious land" (Dan. 11:16, 41); "the pleasant land" (Dan. 8:9); "the glory of all lands" (Ezek. 20:6, 15); "a land flowing with milk and honey" (Ex. 3:8); "a plentiful land" (Jer. 2:7); "a land that the LORD your God cares for. The eyes of the LORD your God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year to the end of the year" (Deut. 11:12). We need not be surprised at such language, for when God chooses for His people, He always chooses the best.

They are given in such detail because of their bearing upon the Jews and the glorious land. This is clear once you recall where Palestine lay in relation to Syria and Egypt. It lay between them, so it formed the highway of approach from either country. In their invasions of each other, the armies of both hostile countries kept marching through the land, and whichever king was winning at the moment held Judea... God could not be indifferent to this, for it touched the welfare of His poor people who had returned from Babylon. So the Spirit of God had the account of all these wars recorded. It shows us the intensity of God's love for His people, whatever their state. It also teaches us that He takes account of the movements of nations as they affect His people's interests.

The Assyrian is seen through his type, Antiochus Epiphanes, the king of the north in his day. The Assyrian does "according to his will" (Dan. 11:16)... Self-will is the common mark of all who oppose Christ.

Dan. 11:21 to 35 refer to Antiochus Epiphanes, type of the king of the north, or Assyrian of the last days.

This is another try at marriage, only the other way round. This time it is not the daughter of the king of the south going to the king of the north. The king of the north gives his daughter Cleopatra to the king of the south, hoping she will keep Syrian influence strong at the court of Egypt. That is what the verse calls "corrupting her," because it clearly went against the very heart of marriage: he was using her to serve his political aims.

I see no reason to apply "the daughter of women" to the Jewish nation. I am satisfied that the usual interpretation is quite sound: the phrase is said of Cleopatra, the young daughter of Antiochus the Great, whom her father offered to Ptolemy Epiphanes.

He judged that a marriage alliance with Egypt would strengthen his hold on that country. So he arranged to marry his daughter, Cleopatra, then a very young child, to the little seven-year-old King of Egypt. He did this hoping her influence would be on his side — corrupting her by asking her to back his schemes and betray her husband and his country, over which she became queen. But our verse (17) says, "She shall not stand on his side [that is, her father's], neither be for him," She turned out to be a faithful wife and did not support her father.

The greatest difficulty in the verse lies in the true force of the phrase which our version translates "and upright ones with him," and the margin note, "much uprightness, or equal conditions." … De Wette supposes that a peace is meant. Gesenius explains the word in Daniel 11:17 of the Jews. Diodati applies it to terms of peace, Martin and Ostervald to success, Luther to reconciliation. Tremellius and Junius understand it as a sham fairness, used to get around the king of Egypt.

Daniel 11 gives us the most extraordinary and detailed prophecy in the whole Word of God. It foretells the reigns of kings, royal marriages, wars, victories, defeats, plots, treaties and assassinations. Remember that, and it stands as striking, unanswerable evidence that God knows the future.

For my own part, I am convinced that verse 20 and those after it give us the history of Antiochus Epiphanes, though his history is no doubt a picture of the Antichrist. The proper account of the Antichrist begins at verse 36, in his political dealings with the land of Judea. This is clearly at "the time of the end."

Antiochus meddles with Greece and takes many of the islands. But this other prince, acting for himself, takes up the contest against the king of the north. Here a new power comes onto the scene — the first mention of the Romans. The prince who comes on his own behalf against the king of the north is a Roman consul. He will not allow Greece to be touched. It was one of the Scipios who stepped in… He is forced to return to Syria, but he will stumble and fall.

A prince appeared on the scene, a Roman commander, for the Roman Republic was allied with Greece. He attacked and defeated the king in two decisive battles. He forced him to hand over the western half of his empire to his victors, and he also laid on him the payment of an immense tribute. To get the money for this tribute, the king of the north launched an expedition against a rich temple. He was killed while trying to plunder it, just as the prediction said: "He shall stumble and fall, and shall not be found" (v. 19).

Later Scipio crushed him at the great battle of Magnesia. Verse 19 describes his end. He made peace and agreed to pay a heavy sum. While trying to collect it some months later, he was assassinated. So the words "He shall stumble and fall, and shall not be found" were fulfilled.

So we may say that verses 6-20 forecast the evil scheming and fighting of these kings, up to the point when the power of Rome became clear. Faced with that power, the king of the north of that day would "stumble and fall, and shall not be found". His successor had to be a mere "raiser of taxes", to meet the demands of Rome.

These wars are given in such detail because of what they meant for the Jews and for the glorious land… That land lay between Syria and Egypt, so it formed the highway of approach from either country… God could not be indifferent to this, since it affected the welfare of His poor people who had returned from Babylon. That is why the Spirit of God has caused the account of all these wars to be recorded. It shows us the intensity of God's love for His people, whatever their state. It also teaches us that He watches how the movements of nations affect their interests.

Daniel 11 gives us the most extraordinary and detailed prophecy in the whole Word of God. Think of what it foretells: the reigns of kings, royal marriages, wars, victories, defeats, plots, treaties, assassinations. All of this is very striking and unanswerable evidence that God knows the future. For who but God could write down such detailed prophecies, which have all come true except one? That one exception is still future, and its fulfilment will surely come.

So we may say that verses 6-20 forecast the evil scheming and fighting of these rival powers, up to the point when the power of Rome became clear. Faced with Rome, the king of the north of that day would "stumble and fall, and not be found". His successor had to be a mere "raiser of taxes", to meet the demands of Rome.

"Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom." The Romans defeated the father, and forced his son to raise a heavy yearly tribute. That was all the poor man did in his whole life. "… but within few days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle." He was killed by one of his own sons.

His successor, "a raiser of taxes" (v. 20), seeking to raise the Roman tribute, plundered the temple at Jerusalem, and, "within few days," he was destroyed, "neither in anger, nor in battle," the very man he had employed to despoil the temple being the instrument of his assassination.

His main work was raising money to pay the war-tax to Rome. He ordered Heliodorus to plunder the temple, but Heliodorus poisoned him. So he was "a raiser of taxes," and he was "destroyed neither in anger, nor in battle." Heliodorus seized the crown, but Antiochus IV destroyed him.

In verse 21 we read that after this "raiser of taxes" there would "stand up a vile person", marked both by cunning flattery and by warlike violence… the man known to history as Antiochus Epiphanes. The chapter dwells on his evil deeds at some length, we believe, because he acted with such violence against the Jews that he becomes a type, or forecast, of the king of the north, who in the last days will be their great enemy.

The questioner is right to look for the last part of this prophecy to be fulfilled in the Jews during the last days. But he should not assume that the Antichrist is described in Daniel 11:20 and the verses after it. For my part, I am convinced that in verse 20 and following we have the history of Antiochus Epiphanes, though no doubt his history is a type of the Antichrist. The real account of the Antichrist begins at verse 36, in his political dealings with the land of Judea. This is clearly at "the time of the end."

These wars are told in such detail because of what they meant for the Jews and the glorious land… Palestine was the battlefield, the outpost of both kingdoms. God could not be indifferent to this, for it touched the welfare of His poor people who had come back from Babylon. So the Spirit of God has had the account of all these wars written down. It shows us how strong God's love for His people is, whatever their state. It also teaches us that He watches the movements of nations as they affect His people's interests.

Here we have history written in advance, and most of this chapter (verses 2-35) has already been fulfilled in history. These predictions and their later fulfilment match so exactly that the enemies of "the Scripture of truth" have claimed Daniel could never have written it hundreds of years before these people were born and fought their battles.

We now come to a monarch, yet "a vile person" (v. 21)... History knows this "vile person" as Antiochus Epiphanes, and he began his reign about 175 B.C. He was not given the honour of the kingdom, because he was not the rightful heir. But he came in peaceably and obtained the kingdom by flatteries, and he fulfilled this description to the letter.

He called himself Epiphanes, which means "illustrious"; but he was such "a vile person" that people called him Epimanes, "madman."

This is the man who is a picture of the last king of the north. Secular history calls him Antiochus Epiphanes. He was morally vile, and most notorious for meddling with the Jews — first by flattery and corruption, and afterwards by violence. The Spirit of God dwells on this man most, because he meddled most with Israel, the glorious land, and the sanctuary. He was the one who enforced idolatry in the temple itself, setting up an image to be worshipped even in the Holy of Holies. That is why he becomes important. Apart from this he was little known, except for his daring wickedness.

His doings, and the things that sprang out of them, occupy us until we come to the end of verse 36... His evil deeds are described at some length, we believe, because he acted with such violence against the Jews that he became a type or forecast of the king of the north, who in the last days will be their great adversary.

One more observation is needed... From verse 21 to the end of verse 35 the prophet is always speaking of the same person. From verse 36 to the end of verse 39 we have the history of this extraordinary king himself. These last verses point to the Antichrist himself. My own opinion is that verses 21 to 31 describe the king of the north instead — though he too is a type of Antichrist. I mention this because many people who have studied the chapter find it hard to decide whether the history of the Antichrist begins at verse 21 or at verse 36.

It was by fair speeches that the son of Gideon won his way, and so with the man of Daniel 11. "His speech was smooth as butter, yet war was in his heart; his words were softer than oil, yet they were drawn swords" (Ps. 55:21). There will be a lamb-like air about him. But in the ears of the elect — who do not know the voice of strangers — his voice is the voice of the dragon (Rev. 13). Antiochus, who is another type of him, worked his way in the same manner... All this deceives the crowds and leads them away, as it deceived the Shechemites. But the remnant — "the people who know their God" — are kept safe.

He was not the rightful heir. He "obtained the kingdom by flatteries." He called himself Epiphanes, which means "illustrious." But he was such "a vile person" that people called him Epimanes, "madman." Daniel 11:21-24.

This is a figure well known in the prophets, and used to signify overwhelming destruction by invading hostile armies. See, for example, Isaiah 8:7-8; Isaiah 10:22; Isaiah 28:2, 15; Jeremiah 47:2; Daniel 11:22, 26. It may also point back to the flood of Noah's day. Then the overflowing waters swept away the corrupt and the godless, and so purified the world of that time.

He began by flatteries and corruption, and ended with violence, overthrowing their worship, deposing the High Priest, Onias II, probably referred to in verse 22 as "the prince of the covenant."

He would not be the rightful heir. By flattery he would disarm opposition and take the kingdom without a fight. He would flood God's land, crushing all resistance and setting aside the leader of God's people, here called the prince of the covenant. He would make a league with the people. Then he would act deceitfully, using corruption and bribery to seize the richest parts of the provinces.

This is the man who typifies the last king of the north. Outside the Bible, history calls him Antiochus Epiphanes. He was morally vile, but he is best known for the way he interfered with the Jews: first by flattery and corruption, and later by violence. This is the man the Spirit of God dwells on most, because he interfered most with Israel, the glorious land, and the sanctuary.

The final events in this prophecy, in verses 21 to 35, describe what the vile Antiochus Epiphanes did. They are given in greater detail for two reasons. They present history that touches God's people, and that history has already been fulfilled. They also picture, with great accuracy, the still greater sorrows the Jewish nation will pass through in the future day of the great tribulation.

God can be, and sometimes is, remarkably exact in the details of a prophecy, and nowhere more so than in this very chapter. And what is the main objection raised by unbelievers against it? That it must have been written after the events had taken place! No historian since those times gives us such a fine account as these few verses do… How completely we can trust the word of God about everything!

Later he was shown what would happen "at the time of the end." The kings of the north and of the south would take up their conflicts again. More than that, a new and alarming person would reign in the land, and both kings would attack him. He is the counterpart of Messiah in evil — the man of sin, as He is the man of righteousness. That is a state totally different from Antiochus Epiphanes, and it cannot be squared with him in any of his phases.

Antiochus IV, Epiphanes. He was not the rightful heir. He "obtained the kingdom by flatteries." He called himself Epiphanes, which means "illustrious." But he was such "a contemptible person" that people called him Epimanes, which means "madman." Daniel 11:21-24.

He would not be the rightful heir, but by flattery would disarm opposition and obtain the kingdom peaceably. He would overflow God's land, crushing all resistance and setting aside the leader of God's people, here called the prince of the covenant. He would make a league with the people, and then work deceitfully to obtain the fattest places of the provinces by corruption and bribery.

Through alliances and trickery he took peaceful possession of the richest part of his kingdom. He also gave gifts on a lavish scale, beyond anything the rulers before him had done. In this way he fulfilled verse 24.

He was morally disgusting. He is most notorious for the way he interfered with the Jews. He used flattery and corruption first, and violence afterwards. He was the one who forced idolatry into the temple itself, setting up an image to be worshipped even in the Holy of Holies. That is why he matters at all. Otherwise he was a man little known, except for daring wickedness.

From verse 21 we have had the account of the king of the north, known in secular history as Antiochus Epiphanes. The Spirit of God has gone into much fuller detail about his history. The reason is his conduct, above all at the close, when he meddled with the Jews, their city, and their sanctuary. That conduct made him a type of the last king of the north. This later king will follow in his predecessors' steps. But his guilt will be far graver in the sight of God — so flagrant that His judgment can wait no longer.

Certainly there is no historian since these times who gives us such an admirable account as we have in these few verses. If I want to know the history of these two rival monarchies, Syria and Egypt, I must look here. How completely we can trust the word of God about everything! It may be unusual for Him to dwell on the kings of the north and of the south, but He does so at times. The great thing He cares for is the souls of His people. May our hearts answer to the interest He takes in us!

It will be seen from the above that the records of history agree perfectly with the prophecy, as faith would expect them to do. It is only unbelief that has any difficulty with God foretelling future events. Without doubt some of the acts of Antiochus Epiphanes are types of what the future king of the North will do to the Jews and Jerusalem. Other prophecies call that future king "the Assyrian."

He was not the rightful heir. He "obtained the kingdom by flatteries." He called himself Epiphanes, which means "illustrious." But he was such "a vile person" that people called him Epimanes, which means "madman." Dan. 11:21-24.

He would not be the rightful heir. By flattery he would disarm opposition and take the kingdom peacefully. He would flood over God's land, crushing all resistance and setting aside the leader of God's people, here called the prince of the covenant. He would make a treaty with the people. Then he would work by deceit to get the richest parts of the provinces through corruption and bribery. He would force idolatry on the people, something his fathers had never done.

This is the man who is a type of the last king of the north. Secular history calls him Antiochus Epiphanes. He was disgusting in his morals. He was most notorious for meddling with the Jews — first by flattery and corruption, and later by violence. This is the man the Spirit of God dwells most on, because he meddled most with Israel, the glorious land, and the sanctuary.

Once he had made himself secure in the kingdom, the record tells what he did — his successes, his deceit, his growing strength, the enlargement of his territory, and his reckless overspending (vv. 22-24).

Through his policy he will make craft prosper in his hand. He will magnify himself in his heart. By peace (or prosperity) he will corrupt many. He will also stand up against the Prince of princes. But he will be broken, and no human hand will do it (Dan. 8:19-25).

These tireless Romans come in again. They had dealt with his father when he attacked Greece. Now the son had his hand at the throat of his prey. The Roman consul came and at once forbade him to do anything further. He even drew a circle round him, as is well known, when the crafty king wanted to gain time and escape an answer. He had to answer before he stepped out of the circle, and he gave it. This was a death-blow to all his policy.

No sober Christian doubts the application of these continuous predictions from verse 5 to 32. Even the unbeliever has to take refuge in the hopeless theory that someone wrote them after the event! They are as clear as the histories of Justin and Diodorus. One might go further and say that no history gives so exact, brief, and clear an account of that period. The Spirit of God dwells with special fullness (Dan. 11:21-32) on the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, the last of these kings in the past. This is because he defiled the sanctuary and sought to make the Jews abandon their faith. Of all these kings he becomes the only remarkable type of their enemy at the end of the age.

His evil doings are dwelt upon at some length, we believe, because he acted with such violence against the Jews as to make him a type or forecast of the king of the north, who in the last days will be their great adversary.

Daniel 11:1-35 is a history of the wars between the king of the north (Syria) and the king of the south (Egypt). Both were branches of the Greek empire, and they often fought in the land of Palestine, which lay between them. The prophecies are so exact that some critics have said someone must have written them after the events. Verses 21 to 35 refer to Antiochus Epiphanes, a type of the king of the north, or Assyrian, of the last days.

But "even for a time" tells of a check that was coming, and the Romans were the ones who applied it. He was afraid of offending the Romans openly. So he waited until the king of the south gathered a large army against him. Then, claiming self-defence, he gathered huge forces of his own, while he had secretly decided all along to attack first. This is foretold in verse 25. He defeated the king of the south twice and took him prisoner.

Once he had taken the glorious land, he would attack the king of the south, who would meet him with a mighty army. Even so, the king of the south would be defeated, because the king of the north would plan schemes against him and corrupt the men who depended on him.

Then, like the kings before him, he set out on a campaign against the king of the south. Treachery in his enemy's court and camp helped him, and he defeated him completely.

We now come to a king who is called "a vile person" (v. 21). He has been chosen as the type of the Assyrian, or the king of the north, of the last days. That is why his career is told in such detail, filling the whole paragraph in verses 21-25.

Egypt will be under the Beast and allied with him, and so a target for attack by the king of the north — Israel's determined political enemy (Dan. 11:25, 29, 42-44).

Daniel 11 gives us the most extraordinary and detailed prophecy in the whole Word of God. It foretells the reigns of kings, royal marriages, wars, victories, defeats, plots, treaties and assassinations. Remember that, and it stands as striking and unanswerable evidence that God knows the future. For who but God could write down such detailed prophecies, which have come true with one exception? The one exception is still future, and it awaits a fulfilment that will surely come.

One of these kingdoms would lie north of the land of Israel, and the other south of it. In the prophecy that follows, the ruler of the southern kingdom is called the king of the south, or Egypt. The ruler of the northern kingdom is called the king of the north, or Syria. As the prophecy goes on, these titles do not always point to the same person. They are official titles for kings of the same line.

After taking the glorious land for himself, he would attack the king of the south. The king of the south would meet him with a mighty army. Even so, the king of the south would be defeated, because the king of the north would scheme against him and corrupt the men who depended on him.

At this time Antiochus impressed the Egyptian troops by appearing as their deliverer, so many of them deserted Ptolemy. So verse 26 was fulfilled: "Even those who eat his [Ptolemy's] food shall break him [that is, Ptolemy's power]. His [Antiochus'] army shall be swept away, and many shall fall down slain."

Then, like the rulers before him, he set out on a campaign against the king of the south. Treachery in his enemy's court and camp helped him, and he defeated him completely.

This picture is well known in the prophets. It stands for the overwhelming destruction brought by invading enemy armies. See, for example, Isaiah 8:7-8; Isaiah 10:22; Isaiah 28:2, 15; Jer. 47:2; Dan. 11:22, 26. It may also point back to the flood in Noah's day, when the rising waters swept away the corrupt and the godless.

This is the man who is a picture of the last king of the north. History outside the Bible calls him Antiochus Epiphanes. He was a morally vile man, but he is best known for the way he interfered with the Jews — first by flattery and corruption, and later by violence. This is the man the Spirit of God says the most about, because he meddled most with Israel, the glorious land, and the sanctuary.

What is the main objection unbelievers raise against this prophecy? That it must have been written after the events had taken place! It is certain that no historian since those times gives us as fine an account as we have in these few verses. If I want to know the history of these two rival kingdoms, Syria and Egypt, I must look here. How completely we can trust the word of God about everything!

It may be an exception to His general rule to dwell on the kings of the north and of the south, but He does so at times. The great thing He cares about is the souls of His people. May our hearts answer to the interest He takes in us!

He was not the rightful heir. He obtained the kingdom by flatteries. He called himself Epiphanes, which means "illustrious." But he was such a vile person that people called him Epimanes, "madman." He invaded Egypt and was at first successful. The two kings then entered into negotiations. Neither of them was sincere in what they agreed to. Their hearts were set on doing mischief, and they "speak lies at the same table."

A treaty seems to be formed in verse 27. Both rulers wear a mask of friendship while they hide treachery in their hearts — "They shall speak lies at the same table, but to no avail, for the end is yet to be at the time appointed."

These two kings would meet and seek to deceive each other at the same table. The king of the north would return to his own land with great riches. In his own heart he had already decided not to keep any covenant, either with the king of the south or with the people of God.

God works unseen, but no less truly, in all the political changes of the day. The clever statesman, the skilful diplomat, is simply an agent in the Lord's hands. He does not know it. Self-will and motives of policy may shape his actions. But God is working towards one end — to display the heavenly and earthly glories of His Son. So kings and statesmen do not thwart God's purpose; without knowing it, they advance it. God is not indifferent, but is behind the scenes of human action.

From verse 21 we have had the account of the king of the north, known in secular history as Antiochus Epiphanes. The Spirit of God has gone into much fuller detail in describing his history. The reason is his conduct at the close, when he interfered with the Jews, their city and their sanctuary. That conduct made him a type of the last king of the north. This last king will follow the same path as those before him, except that his guilt will be far graver in the sight of God — so flagrant, indeed, that God's judgment can wait no longer.

Elsewhere prophecy may give only the general outline of events. But God can be, and sometimes is, exact in the smallest details, and nowhere more so than in this very chapter. And what is the main objection unbelievers raise against it? That someone must have written it after the events took place! Certainly, no historian since those times gives us such an admirable account as these few verses do. If I want to know the history of these two rival monarchies, Syria and Egypt, I must look here. How completely we can trust the word of God about everything!

He invaded Egypt and was at first successful: compare Daniel 11:25-26. The two kings entered into negotiations, but neither of them was sincere in what they agreed to. Their hearts were set on doing harm, and they "tell lies at one table" (Daniel 11:27). Then Antiochus returned to his land with great riches, his heart "against the holy covenant." He entered Jerusalem, and even went into the sanctuary. He took away the golden altar, the lampstand, the table of showbread, the censers of gold, and the other holy vessels, and left.

The king of the north would return to his own land with great riches. In his own heart he had decided to keep no covenant at all — neither the one made with the king of the south nor the one made with the people of God.

Having settled his affairs for the moment with the king of Egypt, he returned to his kingdom "with great riches." Now he showed in some way his enmity against the "holy covenant" — that is, against the Jewish religion, the covenant of God with His people. Then it adds, "and he shall do [exploits], and return to his own land" (v. 28). It is said that on his homeward march he attacked Jerusalem, massacred thousands of its people, and profaned the temple. He did this because the Jews had risen up on a false report of his death.

Notice that these verses mention the "covenant" no less than four times. Three of those times the word "holy" goes with it. What God has covenanted and decreed is always the target of the devil's attack. This man was without a doubt an agent of Satan, working to overthrow what remained of the worship of the one true God at Jerusalem.

From verse twenty-one we have had the account of the king of the north, known in secular history as Antiochus Epiphanes. The Spirit of God has gone into much fuller detail in telling his history. The reason is his conduct, above all at the close, when he meddled with the Jews, their city, and their sanctuary. That conduct made him a type of the last king of the north. This last king will follow the path of those before him, except that his guilt will be graver beyond comparison in the sight of God — so flagrant that His judgment can wait no longer.

We read of an "abomination that makes desolate" in the prophecy about Antiochus (Daniel 11:31), and it has been commonly supposed that our Lord refers to this in Matthew 24:15. … Antiochus Epiphanes was only a type, and verse 31 does not go beyond his history, except as a foreshadowing.

What we have seen shows this. Elsewhere God may give only the general outline of events, but in the details of a prophecy He can be, and sometimes is, exact to the smallest point. And nowhere is this more true than in this very chapter. And what is the main objection unbelievers raise against it? That it must have been written after the events had happened! Certainly no historian since those times gives us such an admirable account as we have in these few verses.

We now come to a king — but "a vile person" (v. 21). He has been specially chosen as the type of the Assyrian, or the king of the north, of the last days. That is why his career is told in such detail... Historians know this "vile person" as Antiochus Epiphanes, and he began his reign about 175 B.C. He was not given "the honour of the kingdom," because he was not the rightful heir. But "he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries," and he fulfilled this description to the letter.

By "the time appointed" we understand what verse 27 states. It is the time God fixed for the ending of the deceitful alliance this king had made with the king of the south. The alliance was not to prosper. So Antiochus broke his treaty and returned in hostility towards his ally. But, as Daniel was told, "it shall not be as the former or as the latter." On those earlier occasions he had prospered in his plans. Now another power steps forward... and checks his victorious career.

Verse 29 tells of another expedition against Egypt, and this one was a disaster. The ships of Chittim came against him — that is, the Roman power. Caius Popilius, Laenas, and other leaders of the Roman army demanded that Antiochus stop troubling the Jews and Egypt. Antiochus tried to dodge the demand. So Caius Popilius at once drew a circle round him and demanded an answer before he stepped out of the ring. Antiochus agreed to the Roman conditions against his will, polite on the outside but raging inside. On his march north he took his revenge on the Jews.

This was a death-blow to all his policy. He went home a miserable, defeated man. His heart was vexed and furious, though he put on a humble appearance before the Romans. What should stop him from pouring out the anger of his heart on the Jews?... The Jews were poor, but they were witnesses for God on the earth. So Antiochus hurries to pour out his fury on whatever bore a testimony to God among them. This was his ruin, and brought God's vengeance on him.

No sober Christian doubts that these unbroken predictions from verse 5 to 32 apply to real history. Even the unbeliever has to take refuge in the hopeless theory that they must have been written after the event!... One might go further and say that no history gives so exact, brief, and clear an account of that period. The Spirit of God dwells with special fullness on the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes (Dan. 11:21-32), the last of these kings in the past. He does so because Antiochus defiled the sanctuary and sought to turn the Jews away from God. So, of all these kings, he alone stands out as the type of the enemy of the Jews at the end of the age.

Without doubt some of the acts of Antiochus Epiphanes are types of the deeds of the future king of the North — referred to in other prophecies as "the Assyrian" — in respect to the Jews and Jerusalem.

Now another power steps forward and checks his victorious career. It was the power that would soon take over from Greece and rule the world as the fourth prophetic kingdom. "For the ships of Chittim shall come against him" (v. 30): the ships of Italy, the country Scripture calls Chittim, in fact a fleet of the Roman republic. Forbidden by the Roman consul to pursue his aims in Egypt, and powerless against such an enemy, he had to return.

Caius Popilius, Laenas, and others, leaders of the Roman army, demanded that Antiochus should stop troubling the Jews and Egypt. When Antiochus tried to dodge the demand, Caius Popilius quickly drew a circle round him. He firmly demanded an answer before the king stepped out of the ring. Antiochus did not want to agree, but he accepted the Roman terms. He looked polite while he raged inside, and he took his revenge on the Jews as he marched north.

This was a death-blow to all his policy. He went home a miserable, defeated man, with a vexed and furious heart, though putting on a humble appearance before the Romans. What was to stop him from pouring out the anger of his heart on the Jews? … Poor as the Jews were, they were witnesses for God on the earth; and Antiochus hurries to pour out his fury on whatever bore a testimony to God among them. This was his ruin, and brought God's vengeance on him.

He had an understanding ("intelligence") with the apostate Jews. We can gather an account of his doings from 1 and 2 Maccabees. They show that he set himself to work to make the Jews pagan. Like Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 3, he wanted to unify his lands by forcing all his subjects to worship the same false gods. This prophecy shows that he largely succeeded among the Jews. Apostates are specified in verses 30 and 32.

A power from the west mixes itself up with these two eastern powers… But further, we also find apostates from the holy covenant. So there are, first, Jews who count as the objects of God's covenant, and Jews who are apostates from it. Second, there are those from the west, north of the Mediterranean, who enter the existing quarrel. These new elements change the whole scene.

From the middle of verse 30 to the end of verse 35 we have the account of what Antiochus did in Jerusalem and the glorious land. Measured by God's standard, his actions were so evil that he is chosen — as has been said more than once — as a type of the powerful enemy of Israel in the last days.

It is a mistake to suppose that this refers to the last days. It is only a type of what will take place then.

"And arms shall stand on his part" — or, more literally, "forces [arms] shall rise from [out of] him." The phrase "shall rise from him," or "shall come from him," can be used in two senses. It can mean a king's lieutenant, the man who takes his place as commander. Or it can mean the man who succeeds him in the government. … "They [the arms] shall pollute the sanctuary of strength [or, which is the fortress]."

This was a death-blow to all his policy. He went home a miserable, defeated man, his heart bitter and furious, though he put on a humble face before the Romans. What was to stop him from pouring out the anger of his heart on the Jews? … Poor as the Jews were, they were witnesses for God upon the earth; and Antiochus hurries to pour out his fury on everything among them that bore witness to God. This was his ruin, and brought God's vengeance upon him.

This is referred to in 1 Maccabees: "The king had sent letters by messengers to Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, telling them to follow the strange laws of the land. They were to forbid burnt offerings, sacrifices and drink offerings in the temple. They were to profane the sabbaths and festival days, and pollute the sanctuary and the holy people. They were to set up altars, groves and chapels of idols, and sacrifice pig's flesh and unclean animals … so that they might forget the law, and change all the ordinances." … From other sources we learn that Antiochus commanded the worship of Jupiter Olympius in place of the worship of the God of heaven, Jehovah.

… the taking away of sacrifice is for, or goes with, the setting up of the abomination. In the ninth chapter it should be clear, then, why as soon as we hear of the one, we hear of the other: "because of the wing of abominations [there shall be] a desolator," as it reads literally: idolatrous abominations bring the desolation.

The expressions the Holy Spirit uses in Dan. 11:31 and in Dan. 12:11 differ. In Dan. 11:31 it means the abomination of him that desolates, or of the desolator. Whereas in Dan. 12:11 the true meaning is that which is given in our Lord's words — not the abomination of him that makes desolate, but the "abomination of desolation" … the desolation spoken of in Dan. 11 is past, and the desolation of Dan. 12, that our Lord draws attention to, is future.

His conduct, above all at the close, in meddling with the Jews, and their city, and their sanctuary, gave the occasion for a type of the last king of the north. That king will follow in his predecessors' path, except that his guilt will be graver beyond comparison in the sight of God … Antiochus Epiphanes was only a type, and verse 31 does not go beyond his history, except as a foreshadowing.

Someone will come on behalf of the man who will be the king of the north in those times. He will bring his forces — his arms — into the holy place. He will defile the sanctuary, and set up "the abomination that makes desolate."

Notice that these verses mention the 'covenant' no less than four times, and three of those times the word 'holy' goes with it. What God has covenanted and decreed is always the object of the devil's attack. This man was without doubt an agent of Satan, working to overturn what remained of the worship of the one true God at Jerusalem.

He will corrupt those who do wickedly as to the covenant — that is, the Jews who are not true to Jewish hopes. He will push them into giving up their faith altogether. That is the force of the word translated 'he will corrupt'. But "the people that do know their God shall be strong and do exploits." Here the Jews are divided into true and false, and good and evil each develop.

There will be a lamb-like air about him. But those God has chosen do not know the voice of strangers, and in their ears his voice is the voice of the dragon. Antiochus, who is another picture of him, worked his way in the same manner. "And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries." All this deceives the mass of the people and leads them away; but the remnant — "the people that do know their God" — are kept safe.

Near the end of his history, resistance to his aim led to a famous revival among the Jews. The Jewish heroes known as the Maccabees resisted his generals... They were no models of piety or patience. But, as Daniel says, they were strong and "did exploits." No phrase could describe them more accurately.

In those days there were not only wicked people whom he could corrupt. There were also 'people that do know their God', and 'that understand among the people'. This is always God's way; He does not leave Himself without a witness of some kind.

God preserved a faithful remnant, and these, knowing their God, were strong and did exploits. The next verse brings in a smaller group — "they that understand among the people." So there were, we think, three classes of Jews. First, the mass, whom flatteries corrupted. Second, the faithful remnant, who refused to give up keeping the law of their God. Last, some among the remnant who, being taught of God, could instruct the others in the word and encourage them in the path of faithfulness, whatever persecution they might face.

Their obedience not only brought reward, it prepared them for the days ahead. In trials and exercise they would learn the character of their God. "The people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits" — and so it was.

We need to look in quite another direction... for the right application of the words "the people that do know their God shall be strong and do exploits." It is the glory of the Christian to suffer. The Maccabees really did exploits... The mistake is applying all this to the present Christian period.

In those days there were not only wicked men whom he could corrupt. There were also "people who know their God," and those "that understand among the people." This is always God's way. He does not leave Himself without a witness of some kind. Here we have a prediction of what happened in those dark days. God raised up the Maccabees, zealous and God-fearing men. Under their leadership deliverance came at last, though not without much loss and suffering, as verse 33 shows.

In the next verse a smaller class comes into view — "they that understand among the people." So we think there were three classes of Jews. First, the mass whom flatteries corrupted. Second, the faithful remnant, who refused to give up keeping the law of their God. Last, some among the remnant who, being taught of God, could instruct the others in the word and encourage them in the path of faithfulness, whatever persecution they might face. This class appears again in chapter 12:3, and its members are called "the Maschilim."

In Daniel 9:27, 11:33 and 12:3 the word translated "many" has the article in Hebrew. It means the mass of the people, which makes the sense of these verses much simpler. The reader will also notice, in contrast with the masses (Dan. 11:33), "the Maschilim," a word found in the titles of many of the Psalms. Those who understand, those who are taught of God, will instruct the many. In these times of trial, love for the truth will be at work.

Here we have those who were persecuted by their enemy — Antiochus Epiphanes. The phrase means "the" many. It is a pity that the article is not carried over into English where it stands in the Hebrew.

Satan's hatred was aimed above all at this class — those who publicly stood with God's testimony on the earth.

The trial of faith will come through them. As faithful Jews, one might have supposed that such men could surely count on the help of God, for they have been urging others to "trust in the Lord." Yet some of them are to fall. Then, unless faith is very strong, the others will say "Where is their God?" as in Psalms 42 and 43.

One striking feature is the repeated mention of those "that understand among the people." They seem to be a class raised up to help Israel in that dark day. God has always provided this resource for His people, especially in difficult times. Long ago there were men of Issachar, who "had understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do" (1 Chron. 12:32). The remnant in the days of Ezra had help from "men of understanding," and it will be the same with the remnant in the future.

This chosen remnant of faithful souls, faithful through grace in a day of the most extreme pressure and persecution, will truly "sow" in tears… But the seed is steeped in their tears and sown in sorrow. In its own time it will sprout, spring up, and bring a rich harvest, when the sower and the reaper will rejoice together.

But they are not left completely in the hands of the enemy. "When they stumble, they shall receive a little help. And many shall join themselves to them with flattery" (v. 34). It could hardly be otherwise. This prophetic account points plainly to the uprising and brave resistance of the Maccabees against the cruelty and profanity of their oppressor. At the start of their rebellion, at least, there was real zeal for God, for His temple and for His law. The success God granted them was great. For years they held back the whole power of the king of the north. Victory after victory, they kept up their just and holy cause.

The Maccabees did "exploits." They were heroes, not martyrs, and God used them as such, for they were faithful to His word. But those of "the end" will be saints, not heroes, and will perish, as we find from Revelation. The cross comes between, and alters these things.

From Jeremiah's day to this, Israel and Jacob have never known such trouble together with such deliverance. The Maccabean successes over their enemies were nothing compared with this prophecy. We also have a prediction of them in Daniel 11. Josephus and the Apocrypha give a history of them, but Scripture does not stoop to record the Maccabean successes.

All this is now a matter of history. It is recalled here only to explain the last clause of verse 34: "many shall join themselves to them with flattery." After the reign of Antiochus, faction and civil strife tore Syria apart, and the Maccabean leaders were courted as often as they were threatened.

So it happened that Antipater, the Edomite father of Herod, got in. For the family had not a shadow of right to reign over the Jews. He simply sided with the last unworthy descendant of the Maccabees, and with Roman help he slipped into power. But God allowed such repayment in His providence, to humble His guilty people.

The wise ones too were among the people, the Jews; and "the many" in verse 33, not in 34, is a technical phrase meaning the mass of that nation.

The phrase means "the" many. It is a pity that the article is not carried over into English where it stands in the Hebrew. For there are the two forms: the word "many" sometimes with the article, and sometimes without it.

But remember: this is history, yet not only history. Antiochus himself, as pointed out again and again, is a pattern of someone still to come. Many of the events of his reign, above all his actions in Jerusalem, are patterns too, so many of these things will happen again at the close.

The word means 'instruction,' and the Psalms that carry it in their headings convey instruction to the remnant, which they will understand. The same word in the plural (maschilim) means 'the wise, or the instructed ones.' See Dan. 11:33, 35; Dan. 12:3, 10.

The trial of faith will come through them. They are faithful Jews, and you would suppose that people like these could count on God's help, since they have been encouraging others to "trust in the Lord." Yet some of them are to fall. Then, unless faith is very strong, the others will say, "Where is their God?" — as in Psalms 42 and 43. Those Psalms express, in the language of the Spirit of Christ, the anguish of the remnant, whose enemies say, "Where is their God?" And when these understanding ones who had hope in Him fall, unbelievers will say that God does not step in to help them.

In this terrible time, there will be among the Jews those who know their God. They will be strong, act for their God, and teach many His ways and His mind. As a result they will face persecution, violence and prison for many days. Yet in all their sorrows they will be helped. God will allow it all, to test and prove them, with the reward and glory of the end in view. That end will surely come, because God has appointed it.

"The end" or "the time of the end" is a technical term in prophecy. So Daniel 11:35 tells us that some of the understanding ones would be tried, that is persecuted, and would fall, that is die as martyrs, "until the time of the end." Verse 40 then predicts war by the king of the south and by the king of the north "at the time of the end." … So "the end" is a period in which events happen. It is not the exact moment when the Son of Man comes, but the last short stretch of time.

Certain disasters were to go on "until the time of the end, for it still awaits the appointed time." There is no place in the chapter where the interruption of the history so well fits in as after verse 35.

Down to Dan. 11:35 everything has been already fulfilled. We read of plots and wars between successive kings of the North and of the South (Syria and Egypt), with the holy land as their battle ground. There is a gap of more than twenty centuries between verses 35 and 36. From the days of the Maccabees we pass to the world's last crisis.

Antiochus caused "the abomination that makes desolate" to be set up in the temple; in Daniel 12:11 we learn that this act will be repeated in a future day. … Take verse 35, where we read that God will allow some of the wise to fall, to test faith, "to purge" the remnant, and "to make them white, until the time of the end." The very language shows that God gives what took place then as a sample of a similar thing in the last days.