And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and speak monstrous things against the God of gods; and he shall prosper until the indignation be accomplished for that which is determined shall be done.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
And he will not regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women; nor regard any +god for he will magnify himself above all.
A new figure steps into Daniel's prophecy at verse 36, called simply "the king," and he dominates the closing scenes. Verse 37 lists three things he refuses to honour, and each refusal tells us who he is and where he comes from.
The chapter has tracked a king of the north and a king of the south. Daniel gives this one no country. That is how an Israelite would speak of his own king.
The second beast of Revelation 13, the man of sin of 2 Thessalonians 2, the king of Daniel 11:36-39, and the antichrist of 1 John 2:18, 22 are clearly the same person. This chapter deals with a king of the north and a king of the south. So some readers have thought that "the king" must be one of those two. But for an Israelite to mention his own king in this indefinite way is perfectly natural, both here and in Isaiah 30:31. When an English newspaper says that "the King" is going to Scotland, there is no need to add "the King of England"... So Daniel and Isaiah name the king of the north or the king of the south when they mean those kings. But "the king," with nothing added, means the king of Israel.
The ESV reads "the gods of his fathers"; older translations have "the God of his fathers," and the commentators work from that singular. A non-Jew would not use the phrase at all.
An Englishman who believes may speak of God as his Father, but he cannot talk of "the God of his fathers" except as imitating the phrase of a Jew. This reference is of course to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. They are the true fathers whom God chose to be the holders of promise, on behalf of their descendants and their land.
One writer adds why that descent matters.
The God of his fathers is mentioned twice, which probably indicates that this person will be of the Jewish race — a strong qualification in someone presenting himself to Israel as Messiah and Messianic king.
The ESV renders this phrase "the one beloved by women"; older translations have "the desire of women." One writer reads it from the company it keeps in the sentence.
The great desire of all Hebrew women was to give birth to the Messiah. So Gabriel greeted Mary as "highly favoured among women," when the miraculous conception of the Saviour was announced. The verse names "the desire of women" between "the God of his fathers" and "any god." That connection shows something similar in nature is meant, not something entirely different. He is an Israelite. Yet he heeds neither the LORD, the God of the nation, nor the Messiah, the hope of the nation, nor even the false gods the nation so often turned to.
Others have read the phrase as the name of an idol. One writer rejects that reading.
In Daniel 11:37, "desire of women" clearly means the Messiah. Gesenius grants some deity is meant, saying the context demands an idol that Syrian women worshipped. Rationalism always cuts down and degrades.
The verse ends with the reason for the whole list: he magnifies himself above all.
This is a strong feature of the pride of man: he magnifies himself above all. He would wipe out every idea of the true God. He is indifferent whether it is real religion of the heart or the religion of his fathers. He dislikes even the name of Christ, called here "the desire of women." He is even against religious customs and religious nationality. He has no respect for any god.
The next verse gives him a god of his own, and that turn exposes something about the human heart.
The Antichrist will be an unbeliever, but not merely an unbeliever. He will have rejected the God of Israel, and the Messiah. Nor will he honour any of the gods of the Gentiles. But even this man, although he sets himself up as the true God on the earth, will still have someone to whom he bows and makes others bow with him. The human heart, even in Antichrist, cannot do without an object of idolatry.
John's letters describe the antichrist by two denials, and they match the refusals here.
On the subject of the Antichrist, the apostle adds in verse 22 that "he denies that Jesus is the Christ... he denies the Father and the Son." We see two sides of his apostasy: first, he joins with Jewish unbelief; second, he rejects Christianity.
- His name. "The king," with no nation attached, is Israel's own king — the same figure called the man of sin and the antichrist elsewhere.
- His first refusal. "The God of his fathers" points back to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, marking him out as a Jew who has abandoned Israel's God.
- His second refusal. "The desire of women" is the Messiah every Hebrew mother longed to bear; he refuses the nation's hope as well as the nation's God.
- His third refusal. He will not even keep the idols his people once ran after. One motive drives all three refusals: he magnifies himself above all.
- His substitute. Verse 38 shows that even the man who claims to be God bows to something. The heart that refuses the true God does not stop worshipping; it invents.
And in his place will he honour the +god of fortresses; and a +god whom his fathers knew not will he honour with gold and silver, and with precious stones and pleasant things.
This king sets himself above every god and refuses the God of his fathers, yet he still bows to something. What is this "god of fortresses," and why does a man who claims to be above all gods pour gold and silver into an idol?
The verse puts one god in place of another. One writer explains the swap and the Hebrew word behind it (older translations read "forces"):
"But in his place he shall honour the god of forces." That is, in the place of the true God he will honour Mahuzzim as God — some form of idolatry. Mahuzzim means fortresses or fortified high places. There is probably some connection between this and the forces of war on which the king counted.
The same writer says when this new religion appears: the king brings it in only after clearing away every other god.
He would erase every idea of the true God... he has no respect for any god. But having reached this point, he needs to keep the people in check. For that he needs instruments, as well as his gods, mahuzzim (fortresses) — a kind of idolatry that he brings in once he has denied every god. This idolatry will be tied to the interests of those who govern.
Worship follows what a man wants. One writer names what is hidden under this king's bowing down:
People do not worship what they do not prize or covet. The most daring in pride knows his own nothingness and bows down to some unworthy superstition. Such a secret but enslaving power is unbelief.
Why fortresses? One writer answers from the limits of what this king has to work with:
But man cannot do without an object of some kind. So he honours the god of fortresses or forces. The resources he relies on to carry out his plans and enforce his decrees cannot, after all, go beyond human strength of arms — though Satan's power acts behind it all.
Another writer describes the motives that produce such a religion, and why it counts as new:
His god is a political idol, sought for the strength it gives — a worship made up of fear and greed. So it is indeed a god whom his fathers did not know. It is none of the old gods the world has been so full of. Yet the dark and dreadful power behind it is the same: the face is changed, but not the heart.
One writer reads this honour as the king's backing for another power:
He gives his support and influence to the first beast (Dan. 11:38): "And he makes the earth and those who dwell in it worship the first beast, whose mortal wound was healed."
One writer reads the spending on gold and silver as a man covering a lack in himself:
Further, this wilful king honours the god of forces. Man is not enough in himself. Despite claiming to be God, this blasphemer must lean on something. So he invents a god to meet his need — probably the image of the first beast set up for worship in the temple.
Writers here identify this king with the antichrist. One shows why people who refuse Christ will welcome him:
Refusing Christ, they would be willing to receive antichrist, who will come in his own name... He will own, and make those he fools own, a god whom his fathers did not know (Dan. 11:38-39), but not "the only God," the God of their fathers.
One writer answers those who say idolatry among the Jews could never return:
I will add that this idolatry belongs to the last days too, however confident some are that idolatry can never be among the Jews again. But the Lord warned them of the contrary, for the last state of that Christ-rejecting generation. The prophets say the same when they speak of the end of the age (Dan. 11:38; Rev. 13:15; Rev. 18:4).
- Empty throne. He clears away the God of his fathers and every other god — then fills the empty place with a new idol.
- Empty man. The one who claims to be above all gods still bows: pride does not remove the need to worship, it only redirects it.
- Empty god. Its name is "fortresses": the worship of armed strength. It is a political idol, sought for the power it lends and made of fear and greed.
- Costly worship. He pours gold, silver, precious stones and costly gifts into a god his fathers never knew — a god he invents to fill his own lack.
- Old heart, new face. The gods of the world change their look, not their nature. Scripture warns that such idolatry will rise again at the end of the age.