Chap 12 -The Time of the End

We can review the the verses of Chap 11:36-12:4 and note that the first 4 verses of Chap 12 continue the vision that actually started in Chap 10.

Note: If vv. 36–45 continue the description of Antiochus Epiphanes, the account must be viewed as erroneous, since the details do not match what is known of Antiochus’ latter days. Most modern scholars take this view, concluding that this section was written just shortly before the death of Antiochus and that the writer erred on several key points as he tried to predict what would follow the events of his own day. Conservative scholars, however, usually understand the reference to shift at this point to an eschatological figure, viz., the Antichrist. The chronological gap that this would presuppose to be in the narrative is not necessarily a problem, since by all accounts there are many chronological gaps throughout the chapter, as the historical figures intended by such expressions as “king of the north” and “king of the south” repeatedly shift.


Note: The opening phrase of chapter 12, and at that time, makes clear that this passage is talking about the same period of time as the previous context, that is, “the time of the end” (11:40). The action here in verse 1 is not subsequent to the preceding events but coincides with them chronologically.


A. Daniel 12:1-4

I. The "Great" tribulation period. The Angel Michael will come to their aid: See Zech
14.

14 A day of the LORD is about to come when your possessions will be divided as plunder in your midst. 2 For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to wage war; the city will be taken, its houses plundered, and the women raped. Then half of the city will go into exile, but the remainder of the people will not be taken away.
3 Then the LORD will go to battle and fight against those nations, just as he fought battles in ancient days. 4 On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives which lies to the east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in half from east to west, leaving a great valley. Half the mountain will move northward and the other half southward. 5 Then you will escape through my mountain valley, for the mountains will extend to Azal. Indeed, you will flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of King Uzziah of Judah. Then the LORD my God will come with all his holy ones with him. 6 On that day there will be no light - the sources of light in the heavens will congeal. 7 It will happen in one day (a day known to the LORD); not in the day or the night, but in the evening there will be light. 8 Moreover, on that day living waters will flow out from Jerusalem, half of them to the eastern sea and half of them to the western sea; it will happen both in summer and in winter.
9 The LORD will then be king over all the earth. In that day the LORD will be seen as one with a single name. 10 All the land will change and become like the Arabah from Geba to Rimmon, south of Jerusalem; and Jerusalem will be raised up and will stay in its own place from the Benjamin Gate to the site of the First Gate and on to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the royal winepresses. 11 And people will settle there, and there will no longer be the threat of divine extermination - Jerusalem will dwell in security.
.


II. A huge important note here is that this is the only Old testament reference to a "final" resurrection. Verse 2 (Rev 20:4) and a different version of "hell" everlasting contempt. This is the only undisputed reference to this event. It is the most clear and written at least in the 2nd century BC(disputed).

III. The Seal and the End.

A. Let it be understood by those in the time of the end. Enough said.

B. Time, Times and 1/2 Time?

Remember:

A time, times, and half a time (cf. Dan. 12:7; Rev. 12:14) refer to the three and one-half years of the Great Tribulation, with “a time” meaning one year, “times” two years, and “half a time” six months. This equals the 1,260 days in Revelation 12:6 and the 42 months in Revelation 11:2; 13:5. (Cf. comments on “times” in Dan. 4:16.)

C. 12:11 refer back to 9:27(seventy weeks) I can not explain the 30 days difference. It will be open for discussion.

Note:

The angel said that 1,290 days will be measured off from the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished (cf. 9:27, “he will put an end to sacrifice”) and the abomination that causes desolation is set up (cf. 9:27, “one who causes desolation will place abominations on a wing of the temple”). The last half of the 70th “seven” of years is “a time, times, and half a time” (7:25; Rev. 12:14), which is three and one-half years. It is also designated as 42 months (Rev. 11:2) or 1,260 days (Rev. 11:3). How then can the variance of 30 days (1,290 compared with 1,260) be explained? Some suggest that the 30 days will extend beyond the end of the Tribulation, allowing for the judgment of Israel and the judgment of the nations. Another possibility is that the 1,290 days will begin 30 days before the middle of the 70th “seven” of years when the world ruler will set up “the abomination that causes desolation” (Matt. 24:15). The 1,290 days could begin with an announcement (about the abomination) made 30 days before the abomination is introduced. This abomination, as stated earlier, will be an image of himself (Rev. 13:14-15) and will be the symbol of this religious system.

D. Dan 12:13

A. An additional 45 days?

Note:

Blessing is pronounced on one who waits for and lives to see the end of the 1,335 days. This is an additional 45 days beyond the 1,290 days (v. 11). Forty-five days after the end of the Tribulation Israel’s long-awaited blessings will be realized. This may mark the blessing of the Millennium; or it may be when Christ, who will have appeared in the heavens (Matt. 24:30) 45 days earlier, will actually descend to the earth, His feet touching down on the Mount of Olives (cf. Acts 1:11). For believers Christ’s coming is a blessing and a glorious hope.

Daniel 11:36-45

Charlie is going to be out of town this weekend so y'all will have to suffer through my limited knowledge. As you can see from the title I am leaving Chapter 12 for Charlie to cover upon his return.

We have an interesting but very challenging text this week. So let's get started.

I. Recap of last week (Ch. 11:1-35)

A. Historical Prophecy
1. Daniel has vision about near-term future (prior to birth of Jesus)
2. Thus, "historical" to us current day readers of Daniel
B. Focus is on continued persecution of the Jews
C. Vs. 35 acts as a transition from historical prophecy to eschatological
prophecy
1. Key phrase, "for there is still an interval until the time appointed."

II. Four questions to be answered

A. What is the temporal setting of the passage?
B. What is the identity of the "willful king"?
C. What is the identity of the King of the North?
D. What is the identity of the "attacker" in 11:40-45?

II. The introduction of the Antichrist - vs. 36-39

A. Shall act as he pleases (will answer to noone)
B. Consider himself greater than any god (consider himself a deity)
C. Blasphemy against God
D. Will prosper until the period of wrath is completed (i.e., he will do well
until the one and only true God says otherwise.)
E. Shall pay no respect to the gods of his ancestors (atheist or believes he
truly is god)
F. ...or to the one beloved by women (some illogically believe this is a
reference that he will be gay)
G. He shall honor the god of fortresses (a reference to having and using strong
military power)
H. He will deal with the strongest of fortresses by the help of a foreign god
1. he will wage war against his enemies
2. this will market the middle of the 70th week (i.e., 3 1/2 years into the
period of tribulation)
I. Vs. 36-39 give us the answers to two of our four questions
1. The temporal setting as we already established is eschatological
2. The 'willful king' can be noone other than the Antichrist.

IV. The last 3 1/2 years (the beginning of the end)

A. Final years will be marked by unbelievable wars
1. First attack against the Antichrist will come from the south
2. Then north will attack
3. Antichrist forces defeat them both
B. Lots of speculation as to who is the king of the north
1. Some say Syria
2. Others say Turkey
3. Majority think it is Russia
4. I say who cares? The point is the world is at war and Armageddon
is right around the corner. We have no way of knowing when the Lord
will come again so it is not possible to know what countries will exist
in those final days.
C. Lots of confusion in vs. 41-45 as to whom is attacking whom.
1. Repeated use of the "He" pronoun causes the confusion
2. At the end of the day one has to believe the "He" in vs. 40 refers to
the king of the north
3. "He" in vs. 41-44 refer to the Antichrist
4. Antichrist destroys many, many Jews before his final defeat.
D. Answers to final two questions.
1. Who is the King of the North? He is the head of a
great power north of Israel which has wide geographical range and of
world political stature, probably Russia. (again pure speculation and
who cares)
2. Who is the "attacker" in 11:40-45? It is the King of the North and not
the Antichrist.

V. Conclusion
1. Lots of action packed into a few verses.
2. For complete picture of prophecy surrounding the tribulation must also
read many other related passages in Ezekiel, Revelations, and
Thessalonians. Jesus himself decribes the end times in Matthew.

Source Material:

1. http://gts.grace.edu/documents/Harton-Dan11-GTJ.pdf
2. http://www.gty.org/Resources/Print/Sermons/27-29

Chap 11 contd

I. The 4 Persian Kings:

Cambyses, Pseudo-Smerdis, and Darius Hystaspes. or

Cambyses II, son of Cyrus the Great, ruled 529-522 BCE
Smerdis (Bardiya), alleged son of Cyrus the Great, ruled 522 BCE (Possibly a usurper)
Darius I the Great, brother-in-law of Smerdis and grandson of Arsames, ruled 521-486 BCE
Xerxes I the Great, son of Darius I, ruled 485-465 BCE

Note on Xerxes:

Xerxes, whose riches were proverbial. Persia reached its climax and showed its greatest power in his invasion of Greece, 480 B.C. After his overthrow at Salamis, Persia is viewed as politically dead, though it had an existence. Therefore, Da 11:3, without noticing Xerxes’ successors, proceeds at once to Alexander, under whom, first, the third world kingdom, Grecia, reached its culmination, and assumed an importance as to the people of God.


II. Verse by Verse Commentary on North and South

11:4.

A few years after Alexander’s death, his kingdom was divided among his four generals (cf. 8:22): Seleucus (over Syria and Mesopotamia), Ptolemy (over Egypt), Lysimacus (over Thrace and portions of Asia Minor), and Cassander (over Macedonia and Greece). This division was anticipated through the four heads of the leopard (7:6) and the four prominent horns on the goat (8:8). Alexander founded no dynasty of rulers; since he had no heirs, his kingdom was divided and the empire was marked by division and weakness.

11:5

The strong king of the South was Ptolemy I Soter, a general who served under Alexander. He was given authority over Egypt in 323 B.C. and proclaimed king of Egypt in 304. The commander referred to in verse 5 was Seleucus I Nicator, also a general under Alexander, who was given authority to rule in Babylon in 321. But in 316 when Babylon came under attack by Antigonus, another general, Seleucus sought help from Ptolemy I Soter in Egypt. After Antigonus’ defeat in 312, Seleucus returned to Babylon greatly strengthened. He ruled over Babylonia, Media, and Syria, and assumed the title of king in 305. Thus Seleucus I Nicator’s rule was over far more territory than Ptolemy I Soter’s.

11:6

Ptolemy I Soter died in 285 B.C. and Ptolemy II Philadelphus, Ptolemy’s son, ruled in Egypt (285-246). Meanwhile Seleucus was murdered in 281 and his son Antiochus I Soter ruled till 262. Then Seleucus’ grandson Antiochus II Theos ruled in Syria (262-246). Ptolemy II and Antiochus II were bitter enemies but finally (after some years) they entered into an alliance in about 250. This alliance was sealed by the marriage of Ptolemy II’s daughter Berenice to Antiochus II. This marriage, however, did not last, for Laodice, whom Antiochus had divorced in order to marry Berenice, had Berenice killed (she was handed over). Laodice then poisoned Antiochus II and made her son, Seleucus II Callinicus, king (246-227).

11:7-8

Berenice’s brother, Ptolemy III Euergetes (246-221), succeeded his father and set out to avenge the death of his sister Berenice. He was victorious over the Syrian army (the king of the North), put Laodice to death, and returned to Egypt with many spoils.

11:9-10

After this humiliating defeat, Seleucus II Callinicus (the king of the North) sought to invade Egypt but was unsuccessful. After his death (by a fall from his horse) he was succeeded by his son, Seleucus II Soter (227-223 B.C.), who was killed by conspirators while on a military campaign in Asia Minor. Seleucus III’s brother, Antiochus III the Great, became the ruler in 223 at 18 years of age and reigned for 36 years (till 187).
The two sons (Seleucus III and Antiochus III) had sought to restore Syria’s lost prestige by military conquest, the older son by invading Asia Minor and the younger son by attacking Egypt. Egypt had controlled all the territory north to the borders of Syria which included the land of Israel. Antiochus III succeeded in driving the Egyptians back to the southern borders of Israel in his campaign in 219-217.

11:11-13

The king of the South in this verse was Ptolemy IV Philopator (221-204 B.C.). He was the one driven back by Antiochus III the Great (cf. comments on v. 10). Ptolemy IV came to meet Antiochus III at the southern borders of Israel. Ptolemy IV was initially successful in delaying the invasion of Antiochus (Ptolemy slaughtered many thousands). But after a brief interruption Antiochus returned with another army (much larger) and turned back the king of the South.

11:14-17

yria was not Egypt’s only enemy, for Philip V of Macedonia joined with Antiochus III against Egypt. Many Jews (your own people, i.e., Daniel’s people, the Jews; cf. “your people” in 9:24; 10:14) also joined Antiochus against Egypt. Perhaps the Jews hoped to gain independence from both Egypt and Syria by joining the conflict, but their hopes were not realized.
Antiochus then sought to consolidate control over Israel from which he had expelled the Egyptians. The fortified city seems to refer to Sidon which Antiochus captured in 203 B.C. Antiochus III continued his occupation and by 199 had established himself in the Beautiful Land (cf. 8:9; 11:41). Antiochus sought to bring peace between Egypt and Syria by giving his daughter to marry Ptolemy V Epiphanes of Egypt. But this attempt to bring a peaceful alliance between the two nations did not succeed (v. 17).

11:18-19

Antiochus III then turned his attention to Asia Minor in 197 B.C. and Greece in 192. However, Antiochus did not succeed because Cornelius Scipio (a commander) was dispatched from Rome to turn Antiochus back. Antiochus returned to his own country in 188 and died a year later. Antiochus III the Great had carried on the most vigorous military campaigns of any of Alexander’s successors, but his dream of reuniting Alexander’s empire under his authority was never realized.

11:20

Antiochus III’s son Seleucus IV Philopator (187-176 B.C.) heavily taxed his people to pay Rome, but he was poisoned (destroyed … not in … battle) by his treasurer Heliodorus.

(3) Invasion by Antiochus IV Epiphanes (11:21-35). These verses describe Antiochus IV Epiphanes, a son of Antiochus III the Great. This one Seleucid who ruled from 175-163 B.C. is given as much attention as all the others before him combined. He is the little horn of Daniel 8:9-12, 23-25. A long section (11:21-35) is devoted to him not only because of the effects of his invasion on the land of Israel, but more so because he foreshadows the little horn (king) of 7:8 who in a future day will desecrate and destroy the land of Israel.


11:21-22

Antiochus IV is introduced as a contemptible person. He took to himself the name Epiphanes which means “the Illustrious One.” But he was considered so untrustworthy that he was nicknamed Epimanes which means “the Madman.” The throne rightly belonged to Demetrius Soter, a son of Seleucus IV Philopator, but Antiochus IV Epiphanes seized the throne and had himself proclaimed king. Thus he did not come to the throne by rightful succession; he seized it through intrigue. He was accepted as ruler because he was able to turn aside an invading army, perhaps the Egyptians. He also deposed Onias III, the high priest, called here a prince of the covenant.

11:23-24

After his military victories, Antiochus Epiphanes’ prestige and power rose with the help of a comparatively small number of people. He evidently sought to bring peace to his realm by redistributing wealth, taking from the rich and giving to his followers.

11:25-27

After Antiochus consolidated his kingdom, he moved against Egypt, the king of the South, in 170. Antiochus was able to move his army from his homeland to the very border of Egypt before he was met by the Egyptian army at Pelusium near the Nile Delta. In this battle the Egyptians had a large … army but were defeated and Antiochus professed friendship with Egypt. The victor and the vanquished sat at a table together as though friendship had been established, but the goal of both to establish peace was never realized for they both were deceptive.

11:28

Antiochus carried great wealth back to his homeland from his conquest. On his return he passed through the land of Israel. After his disappointment in Egypt (he had hoped to take all of Egypt but failed) he took out his frustrations on the Jews by desecrating the temple in Jerusalem. Evidently he opposed (set his heart … against) the entire Mosaic system (the holy covenant). After desecrating the temple, he returned to his own country.

11:29-30a

Two years later (in 168) Antiochus moved against Egypt (the South) again. As he moved into Egypt, he was opposed by the Romans who had come to Egypt in ships from the western coastlands (lit., “ships of Kittim”; cf. NIV marg., i.e., Cyprus). From the Roman senate Popillius Laenas took to Antiochus a letter forbidding him to engage in war with Egypt. When Antiochus asked for time to consider, the emissary drew a circle in the sand around Antiochus and demanded that he give his answer before he stepped out of the circle. Antiochus submitted to Rome’s demands for to resist would be to declare war on Rome. This was a humiliating defeat for Antiochus Epiphanes (he will lose heart) but he had no alternative but to return to his own land.

11:30b-32

For a second time (cf. v. 28) Antiochus took out his frustration on the Jews, the city of Jerusalem, and their temple. He vented his fury against the holy covenant, the entire Mosaic system (cf. v. 28), favoring any renegade Jews who turned to help him (cf. v. 32). He desecrated the temple and abolished the daily sacrifice. Antiochus sent his general Apollonius with 22,000 soldiers into Jerusalem on what was purported to be a peace mission. But they attacked Jerusalem on the Sabbath, killed many people, took many women and children as slaves, and plundered and burned the city.
In seeking to exterminate Judaism and to Hellenize the Jews, he forbade the Jews to follow their religious practices (including their festivals and circumcision), and commanded that copies of the Law be burned. Then he set up the abomination that causes desolation. In this culminating act he erected on December 16, 167 B.C. an altar to Zeus on the altar of burnt offering outside the temple, and had a pig offered on the altar. The Jews were compelled to offer a pig on the 25th of each month to celebrate Antiochus Epiphanes’ birthday. Antiochus promised apostate Jews (those who … violated the covenant; cf. v. 30) great reward if they would set aside the God of Israel and worship Zeus, the god of Greece. Many in Israel were persuaded by his promises (flattery) and worshiped the false god. However, a small remnant remained faithful to God, refusing to engage in those abominable practices. Antiochus IV died insane in Persia in 163 B.C. (Cf. comments on this Antiochus in 8:23-25.)

11:33-35

The Jews who refused to submit to Antiochus’ false religious system were persecuted and martyred for their faith. The word fall (vv. 33-34), literally “stumble” (kāšal), refers to severe suffering on the part of many and death for others. This has in view the rise of the Maccabean revolt. Mattathias, a priest, was the father of five sons. (One of them, Judas, became well known for refurbishing and restoring the temple in late 164 B.C. He was called Judas Maccabeus, “the Hammerer.”) In 166, Mattathias refused to submit to this false religious system. He and his sons fled from Jerusalem to the mountains and began the Maccabean revolt. At first only a few Jews joined them. But as their movement became popular, many joined them, some out of sincere motives and some from false motives. The suffering that the faithful endured served to refine and purify them. This time of persecution was of short duration. It had previously been revealed to Daniel that the temple would be desecrated for 1,150 days (8:14; see comments on 8:23-25). Here Daniel was assured that this persecution would run its course and then be lifted, for its end will still come at the appointed time.

III. Future or Not

A. The King is ?

All the events described thus far in chapter 11 are past. The intricate details of the conflicts between the Seleucids and the Ptolemies were fulfilled literally, exactly as Daniel had predicted. So detailed are the facts that skeptics have denied that the book was written by Daniel in the sixth century B.C. They conclude that the book must have been written during the time of the Maccabees (168-134 B.C.) after the events took place. However, the God who knows the end from the beginning, was able to reveal details of forthcoming history to Daniel.
In verses 36-45 a leader is described who is introduced simply as “the king.” Some suggest that this is Antiochus IV Epiphanes and that the verses describe additional incursions of his into Israel. However, the details given in these verses were not fulfilled by Antiochus. True, Antiochus was a foreshadowing of a king who will come (cf. comments on 8:25). But the two are not the same. One is past and the other is future. The coming king (the little “horn” of 7:8 and “the ruler” of 9:26) will be the final ruler in the Roman world. His rise to prominence by satanic power is described in Revelation 13:1-8 where he is called a “beast.” According to John (Rev. 17:12-13), he will gain authority not by military conquest but by the consent of the 10 kings who will submit to him. Starting with Daniel 11:36 the prophecy moves from the “near” to the “far.”

The events recorded in verses 36-45 will occur during the final seven years of the 70 sevens (9:24).

11:36-45 and 12:1-13 discussion will be Next Week

2/28/10 Dan 10-12

Will continue our discussion on the end of Chap 9 and then begin on Chap 10.

Chap 10: This chapter is a prelude to 11 and 12. It is again focused on Israel and the return to their homeland.

This third year of Cyrus is 536BC. Daniel is about 84 years old.

He has been fasting and praying for three weeks.

He had company for a short time. I'm not sure hy they left, but Daniel was left alone.

I. First note, V12 applied your mind Heb (gave your heart). Daniel was aware I believe

v 20 -The Prince of Persia: Refer to Eph 1 & 6. There is a very weak argument that these "forces" were human. That is to say Michael and Gabriel were trying to intervene on behalf of the exiles. There return to Israel was still in question, See Ezra 4 and the fact that Cyrus's son Cambyses was opposed to the exiles leaving. This argument is extremely weak in that the text does not agree in any manner with that interpretation.

v 21 Michael- The "prince" of Israel.

There can be no misunderstanding about what Daniel wrote here. The implication and literal meaning is that there are "princes" at work behind these nations or "peoples". You can call them Demons or "fallen" angels, due to the fact that they are fighting with God's "angels". The best understanding is written by Paul in Eph 6:12. There is a spiritual realm in which we have very little understanding, we can reason or suppose but it has not been revealed to us for a good reason.



II. The message Chap 11

A. 3 more "Kings".

Here are the Kings of the Persian Empire:

Teispes of Anshan, son of Achaemenes
Cyrus I of Anshan, son of Teispes
Cambyses I of Anshan, son of Cyrus I
Cyrus II, the Great, son of Cambyses I, ruled from c.550-530 BCE E(ruler of Anshan c. 559 BCE – conquered Media 550 BCE)
Cambyses II, son of Cyrus the Great, ruled 529-522 BCE
Smerdis (Bardiya), alleged son of Cyrus the Great, ruled 522 BCE (Possibly a usurper)
Darius I the Great, brother-in-law of Smerdis and grandson of Arsames, ruled 521-486 BCE
Xerxes I the Great, son of Darius I, ruled 485-465 BCE
Artaxerxes I Longimanus, son of Xerxes I, ruled 465-424 BCE
Xerxes II, son of Artaxerxes I, ruled 424 BCE
Sogdianus, half-brother and rival of Xerxes II, ruled 424-423 BCE
Darius II Nothus, half-brother and rival of Xerxes II, ruled 423-405 BCE
Artaxerxes II Mnemon, son of Darius II, ruled 404-359 BCE (see also Xenophon)
Artaxerxes III Ochus, son of Artaxerxes II, ruled 358-338 BCE
Artaxerxes IV Arses, son of Artaxerxes III, ruled 338-336 BCE
Darius III Codomannus, great-grandson of Darius II, ruled 336-330 BCE

It is important to not that the text does not say that there will be four kings of Persia, however it refers to the next 4, Cambyses II, Darius I the Great, Smerdis and Xerxes I the Great. We can debate over the quick "rule" of Smerdis (Bardiya). There are many interesting stories here, but the reality is he ruled a few months and did some interesting things before Darius killed him.

2-14-10 Daniel Chap 9

First, I want to point out 2 passages to start the lesson;

1. Jer 25:11-14 (the 70 years 605-539?)



2. 2 Thess 2:2-12 Paul speaking about the "return of Christ"

A. Daniels Prayer: First note the process. This is not a short prayer it is pure supplication, and worship.
This is a process of fasting, reflection and prayer over several days. What would happen now if we practiced this. What would this look like today?

B. Daniel's 70 weeks Dan 9:20-

Again, I believe that there can be no other way to see this than through a pre-millenial view. I would suggest strongly that it doesn't make sense from any other perspective.

1. Daniel's prayers are answered 20-21, note the entrance of Gabriel. Also the weariness at the end of verse 21.

2. "understanding and a vision" for God's People (Jews) and the "holy mountain" Jerusalem.

3. It is important to not why the "7s" are used. It is called a heptads. Old Law demanded every seven years was a Sabbath rest year. Seven "sevens" was a Jubilee. Seventy "sevens" is a span of 490 years.

4. It must be noted that this "vision" or prophecy is for the city of Jerusalem and the Jews. It can be interpreted no other way.

5 Jer. 25:11 noted seventy years for Judah's captivity. See also 2 Chron 36:21 and of course Ezra 1.

6. Verse 24 Consider that this is a summary of God's plan. If you will note each passage, it reaches back to the beginning, it puts an end to sin through atonement, bring about his kingdom as revealed through the prophecy given to the prophets ending with his son the messiah.

7. The seven weeks-49 years..it only depends on when you start it. I add the following notes to better explain why it begins on March 5, 444BC.


The 70 "sevens" would begin, Gabriel said, with the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem. This decree was the fourth of four decrees made by Persian rulers in reference to the Jews. The first was Cyrus’ decree in 538 b.c. (2 Chron. 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-4; 5:13). The second was the decree of Darius I (522-486) in 520 b.c. (Ezra 6:1, 6-12). This decree actually was a confirmation of the first decree. The third was the decree of Artaxerxes Longimanus (464-424) in 457 b.c. (Ezra 7:11-26). The first two decrees pertain to the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem and the third relates to finances for animal sacrifices at the temple. These three say nothing about the rebuilding of the city itself. Since an unwalled city was no threat to a military power, a religious temple could be rebuilt without jeopardizing the military authority of those granting permission to rebuild it. No one of these three decrees, then, was the decree that formed the beginning of the 70 sevens.

The final decree:


The fourth decree was also by Artaxerxes Longimanus, issued on March 5, 444 b.c. (Neh. 2:1-8). On that occasion Artaxerxes granted the Jews permission to rebuild Jerusalem’s city walls. This decree is the one referred to in Daniel 9:25.

Now I know the question your asking and here ya go:

The 483 Years in the Jewish and Gregorian Calendars :
Jewish Calendar (360 days per year *) Gregorian Calendar (365 days a year)
(7×7) + (62×7) years = 483 years
483x360=173,880 days

444 B.C. to A.D. 33 = 476 years †

476 years× 365 =173,740

173,740 days+ 116 days in leap years ‡
+
24 days (March 5–March 30)
__________________________
173,880 days

Go figure

B. The 490 years divided

1. 49 years for rebuilding of temple. give or take Ezra explains the details.
2. 62 "sevens" 434 years. We can argue the day of Christ's triumphal entry or his crucifiction based on census data from Roman manuscripts, but nevertheless its AD 33.

Now the important issue arises in how we view this passage.

C. Verse 26 says

Now after the sixty-two weeks,
an anointed one will be cut off and have nothing.
As for the city and the sanctuary,
the people of the coming prince will destroy them.
But his end will come speedily like a flood.
Until the end of the war that has been decreed
there will be destruction.

Note Matt 16:18
and Matt 21:42-43

The annointed one was cut off after the "62 "sevens"
This is the death of the messiah.
The city and the Sanctuary was destroyed by the coming prince (Romans/ Titus Note Dan 7:8 the little horn) AD70....Note the people of the coming prince.

I strongly believe that the break or gap between verse 26-27 is where we are now, it is the "church age" as so many like to call it, the time of the gospel to spread among all nations and peoples. Just read the new testament.

D. Verse 27 The last 7 weeks or the 70th "seven"

2 Thess 2:2 Paul writes:

2 Now regarding the arrival of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to be with him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to be easily shaken from your composure or disturbed by any kind of spirit or message or letter allegedly from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord is already here. 3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not arrive until the rebellion comes and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction. 4 He opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, and as a result he takes his seat in God’s temple, displaying himself as God. 5 Surely you recall that I used to tell you these things while I was still with you. 6 And so you know what holds him back, so that he will be revealed in his own time. 7 For the hidden power of lawlessness is already at work. However, the one who holds him back will do so until he is taken out of the way, 8 and then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will destroy by the breath of his mouth and wipe out by the manifestation of his arrival. 9 The arrival of the lawless one will be by Satan’s working with all kinds of miracles and signs and false wonders, 10 and with every kind of evil deception directed against those who are perishing, because they found no place in their hearts for the truth so as to be saved. 11 Consequently God sends on them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false. 12 And so all of them who have not believed the truth but have delighted in evil will be condemned.

D contd
a. Who is the "he"? one week literally is "one seven"
b. Middle of that week (3 and 1 half years).
c. He will stop the sacrifices (how can this be Ephinanes IV)
d. Unfortunately you have to go to Revelation to get the rest of the story.

Ch. 8 / 9 - More Prophecies

Hello everyone. I'm back! Charlie is away this week so I will be leading our discussion on Sunday.

Last week I believe we made it through 8:14. Thus, this week we will pick it up at 8:15 and hopefully make it through chapter 9. Before I dive into the text I thought it might be appropriate and helpful to take a step back and review what we've covered in the first 7 and 1/2 chapters. In doing so I also want to take a 30,000 foot view of the ground we've covered. Hopefully this will give us a broader perspective and make the text in the last half of chapter 8 and the text in chapter 9 easier to understand.

Let's get started.

I. Overview and Review

A. Daniel - Who is he?
1. Daniel belonged to those Jews who had been led away captive to Babylon
at the first siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar in the year 605 ( compare Dan. 1:1-2 with 2 Kings 24:1 and 2 Chron. 36:6-7).
2. Comes to Bablyon at a young age, probably a teenager.
3. Quickly recognized by Babylonian rulers as a leader. He and his friends are indoctrinated in the ways of the Babylonians.
B. Book of Daniel
1. First 6 chapters tell Daniel's story relative to his life in Babylon
2. Chapters 7 - 12 are prophetic.
3. Chapter 7 contains a second revelation on the four world empires. According to Arend Remmers in his commentary, The Prophet Daniel, this is God's view of the four world empires (Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome). Compare this to Nebuchadnezzar's human view in his dream captured in Chapter 2. (See insert above)

4. Chapter 8 tells us of the second and third empire (Persia and Greece)

5. Chapter 9 is about the end of the Babylonian exile and the coming Messiah

II. Second Half of Chapter 8

A. Recall first half (first 14 verses) is Daniel telling us his vision containing farm animals, a ram and a goat.

B. Second half (v.15 forward) is Gabriel interpreting the vision for Daniel.

1. Gabriel describes Daniels vision as being for "the time of the end." (v.17)

2. Ram with two horns represents the Medo-Persian empire.

a. one horn represents King of Media, second horn is King of Persia

3. Male goat represents King of Greece

a. great horn is first king (Alexander).

b. 4 kings supplant first king (Egypt, Asia, Macedonia, Syria)

4. 4 kingdoms supplanted by Rome. Last Grecian empire ruler was Antiochus Epiphanes

a. described in v.23-25

b. Charlie has in past weeks spoken extensively about him

5. in v. 26 Gabriel confirms the accuracy of Daniels vision regarding the 2300 evenings and mornings.

III. Chapter 9 - Three Part: 70 Years, A Prayer of Supplication, and 70 Weeks Prophecy

A. v.1-2 - Daniel is reading Jeremiah and determines 70 years must pass before Jews can return home.

1. This is said to occur in the first year of Darius's rein. That would make it 7 years after the vision described in chapter 8.

2. Daniels reading and meditation leads him to pray for his people and their sins.

B. v.3-19 - Prayer of Supplication

1. Daniel prays for sins of his people (i.e., why they are in exile)

2. Prays for God to once again shine favor on his desolated sanctuary (Jerusalem)

C. The Seventy Weeks

1. OK folks here is where it gets interesting

2. Seventy week prophecy concerns the timing of the appearance of the Messiah.

3. Seventy weeks actually represents (70 x 7) 490 years.

4. Starting point for counting the 490 years is commandment to rebuild temple (approx. 445 BC)

5. Here I am going to rely heavily on the position held by Arend Remmers.

a. 70 year weeks fall into 3 periods

1. 7 weeks (49 years)

2. 62 weeks (434 years)

3. 1 week (7 years)

b. 49 years - Jerusalem and the temple are rebuilt (see Nehemiah)

c. 434 years - takes us up through Maccabeeian revolt and Roman rule to AD 32/33

1. we all know what happened then...Jesus died on cross and was resurrected. "an anointed one shall be cut off and shall having nothing."

2. v. 26 foretells second destruction of the temple

d. Last seven years (or 70th week)

1. This is where it gets very interesting. According to Remmer (pre-millenial view) the 70th week doesn't immediately follow the 69th week.

2. 70th week follows "time of grace" - we're currently living in this time

3. 70th week starts after the rapture and is broken into two 3 1/2 periods.

4. First 3 1/2 year period is first half of tribulation period. Antichrist is friendly towards Israel and Jews

5. Second 3 1/2 period is last half of the tribulation period. Antichrist takes over Jerusalem, desecrates temple

6. End of 70th week - Our Lord and Savior returns.

7. A-millenial view

a. "prince who is to come" is Antiochus Epiphanes

b. "annointed one who is cut off" is high priest Onias III

c. First 3 1/2 year period of covenant is between Hellenizing Jews and Antiochus

d. Second 3 1/2 year period all sacrifice and offering ceases. Jews not allowed to worship their God.

e. 7 year period ends with Maccabeean revolt. Temple is purified and restored.

1/31/10 Chap 8

Continue Chap 7

See notes from last week.

Chap 8:

Daniel chapter 8 is a preacher’s nightmare. Even noted scholars hesitate to be dogmatic in their interpretation of this chapter. Daniel himself has not the foggiest notion of the vision’s meaning, even after the angel Gabriel has interpreted the vision for him.

Daniel had a purpose for including this information in his introduction. He wants his readers to know that the prophecy of chapter 8 must be understood in the context of the reign of Belshazzar, and particularly in light of the events described in chapter 5. Further, the prophecy of chapter 8 should be understood in relationship to the prophecy of chapter 7. Even though the prophecy of chapter 7 is written in Aramaic and chapter 8 in Hebrew, these two prophecies cannot be understood in isolation; they must be understood in relationship to each other.

Verse 1 tells us when Daniel received the vision and explains the relationship of the second vision to the first, recorded in chapter 7. Verse 2 is more geographical, telling us not where Daniel was when he received the vision, but where he was in the vision. His vision transported him both in time and space,83 as he found himself in Susa,84 about 150 miles north of the head of the Persian Gulf. Susa, the ancient capital of Elam, was destined in a few years to become a leading city in the Persian empire and the location of the king’s palace (see Nehemiah 1:1; Esther 1:2, 5: 2:3, 5). The canal (or river, see marginal note in NASB) mentioned by Daniel may have been the very one down which Alexander would later sail his fleet.85

How dramatically “things to come” are communicated to the prophet Daniel. He is actually transported to the future capital of the Persian empire. There, in Susa, beside the Ulai Canal, he learns that the two kingdoms which will follow the Babylonian empire will be Medo-Persia and Greece (see verses 20-21). We might liken it to an English prophet in the sixteenth century being transported to Washington D.C. in the twenty-first century. It will be some 12 years until the death of Belshazzar and the end of the Babylonian domination of the world, but Daniel’s vision takes him to the very capital of Persia where Nehemiah and Esther will later dwell.

Introduction: Alexander (The Ram)

Though his father Philip II of Macedonia had united all the Greek city-states except Sparta, Alexander is considered Greece’s first king.




Alexander the Great (the prominent horn, 8:5) came from the west with a small but fast army. He was enraged (v. 6) at the Persians for having defeated the Greeks at the Battle of Marathon (490 B.C.) and the Battle of Salamis (481), Greek cities near Athens. He quickly conquered Asia Minor, Syria, Egypt, and Mesopotamia in a few years, beginning in 334 B.C. The Persians were helpless to resist him (v. 7). (See the map on p. 1357, “The Route of Alexander’s Conquests.”) Alexander died of malaria and complications from alcoholism in 323 B.C. at the age of 32 in Babylon. At the height of his power he was cut off (v. 8).

Alexander had no obvious or legitimate heir, his son Alexander IV by Roxane being born after Alexander's death. This left the huge question as to who would rule the newly-conquered, and barely-pacified Empire.[147] According to Diodorus, Alexander's companions asked him when he was on his deathbed to whom he bequeathed his kingdom; his laconic reply was "tôi kratistôi"—"to the strongest".[128] Given that Arrian and Plutarch have Alexander speechless by this point, it is possible that this is an apocryphal story.[148] Diodorus, Curtius and Justin also have the more plausible story of Alexander passing his signet ring to Perdiccas, one of his bodyguard and leader of the companion cavalry, in front of witnesses, thereby possibly nominating Perdiccas as his successor.[128][147]

In any event, Perdiccas initially avoided explicitly claiming power, instead suggesting that Roxane's baby would be king, if male; with himself, Craterus, Leonnatus and Antipater as guardians. However, the infantry, under the command of Meleager, rejected this arrangement since they had been excluded from the discussion. Instead, they supported Alexander's half-brother Philip Arrhidaeus. Eventually, the two sides reconciled, and after the birth of Alexander IV, he and Philip III were appointed joint kings of the Empire—albeit in name only.[149]

It was not long, however, before dissension and rivalry began to afflict the Macedonians. The satrapies handed out by Perdiccas at the Partition of Babylon became power bases each general could use to launch his own bid for power. After the assassination of Perdiccas in 321 BC, all semblance of Macedonian unity collapsed, and 40 years of war between "The Successors" (Diadochi) ensued before the Hellenistic world settled into four stable power blocks: the Ptolemaic kingdom of Egypt, the Seleucid Empire in the east, the kingdom of Pergamon in Asia minor, and Macedon. In the process, both Alexander IV and Philip III were murdered.[150]

Initial partition 320BC:



After the Diadoch Wars 300BC:




I. The Ram and the Goat Chap 8
A. Why the farm animals compared to Chap 7?
B. The Ram ( Media and Persia)
C. Note the longer “higher” one coming after the shorter one. V 3
a. Media is the first one.
b. Persia the second.
c. I explained earlier from history that the initial kingdom looks more like a confederacy than an empire. Remember a Median army captured Babylon and it was ruled by a Median governor. The latter Persian Empire dominated with leaders like Darius and Xerxes.
D. The Goat
a. Why a goat. Actual interpretation is “ a he goat of the goats”
b. Greece (Democratic)
c. The “conspicuous” horn is Alexander I.
d. The four horns are: Kingdom of Ptolemy I Soter (Egypt), Kingdom of Cassander (Greec e/Macedonia), Kingdom of Lysimachus (Lydia/Western Turkey) and Kingdom of Seleucus I Nicator (Assyria, Babylon and Persia).
e. The end of their rule. Selucia fell to the Romans around 63 BC by Pompey.
Selucia was made into a Roman province due to its instability and revolts.
f. Ptolemy fell about 20 years later to the Romans. You should remember the stories of Cleopatra VII and Cesaer.
g. Anitiochus Epiphines and Israel (Maccabean Revolt)
Notes on the Maccabean revolt:

In the 2nd century BCE, the land of Israel lay between Egypt and the Seleucid empire. Both Egypt and the Seleucid empire were states descended from the break up of Alexander the Great’s Greek empire. Since the rule of Alexander in 336–323 BCE, a process of Hellenization had spread through the near East. When Antiochus IV Epiphanes (ca. 215–164 BCE), became ruler of the Seleucid Empire in 175 BCE, Hellenizing Jews had been long-established in Israel. They had built a gymnasium, competed internationally in Greek games, "removed their marks of circumcision and repudiated the holy covenant"[1]
Conflict over the appointment of the High Priest and corruption contributed to the causes of the Maccabean Revolt. The High Priest in Jerusalem was Onias III. His brother Jason, who favoured the Seleucids, bribed Antiochus to make him High Priest instead. Antiochus was insensitive to the views of religious Jews and treated the High Priest as a political appointee and one from whom money could be made. To Antiochus the High Priest was merely a local governor within his realm, who could be appointed or dismissed at will, while to orthodox Jews he was divinely appointed.[2]
Menelaus (who was not even a member of the Levite priestly family) then bribed Antiochus and was appointed High Priest in place of Jason. Menelaus had Onias assassinated. His brother Lysimachus took holy vessels from the Temple, causing riots and the thief's death at the hands of the rioters. Menelaus was arrested and arraigned before Antiochus, but he bribed his way out of trouble. Jason subsequently drove out Menelaus and became High Priest again. Antiochus pillaged the Temple, attacked Jerusalem and "led captive the women and children".[3] From this point onwards, Antiochus pursued a Hellenizing policy with zeal. This effectively meant banning traditional Jewish religious practice. In 167 BCE Jewish sacrifice was forbidden, sabbaths and feasts were banned and circumcision was outlawed. Altars to Greek gods were set up and animals prohibited to Jews were sacrificed on them. The Olympian Zeus was placed on the altar of the Temple. Possession of Jewish scriptures was made a capital offence. The king's motives are unclear. He may have been incensed at the overthrow of his appointee, Menelaus,[2] he may have been responding to a Jewish revolt that had drawn on the Temple and the Torah for its strength, or he may have been encouraged by a group of radical Hellenizers among the Jews.[4]
After Antiochus issued his decrees forbidding Jewish religious practice, a rural Jewish priest from Modiin, Mattathias the Hasmonean, sparked the revolt against the Seleucid Empire by refusing to worship the Greek gods. Mattathias killed a Hellenistic Jew who stepped forward to offer a sacrifice to an idol in Mattathias' place. He and his five sons fled to the wilderness of Judah. After Mattathias' death about one year later in 166 BCE, his son Judah Maccabee led an army of Jewish dissidents to victory over the Seleucid dynasty in guerrilla warfare, which at first was directed against Jewish collaborators, of whom there were many. The Maccabees destroyed pagan altars in the villages, circumcised children and forced Jews into outlawry.[4] The term Maccabees as used to describe the Jewish army is taken from its actual use as Judah's surname.

The revolt itself involved many battles, in which the Maccabean forces gained notoriety among the Syrian army for their use of guerrilla tactics. After the victory, the Maccabees entered Jerusalem in triumph and ritually cleansed the Temple, reestablishing traditional Jewish worship there and installing Jonathan Maccabee as high priest. A large Syrian army was sent to quash the revolt, but returned to Syria on the death of Antiochus IV. Its commander Lysias, preoccupied with internal Syrian affairs, agreed to a political compromise that restored religious freedom.

The Jewish festival of Hanukkah celebrates the re-dedication of the Temple following Judah Maccabee's victory over the Seleucids.
Following the re-dedication of the temple, the supporters of the Maccabees were divided over the question of whether to continue fighting or not. When the revolt began under the leadership of Mattathias, it was seen, in the view of the author of the First Book of Maccabees, as a war for religious freedom to end the oppression of the Seleucids. However, as the Maccabees realized how successful they had been, many wanted to continue the revolt and conquer other lands with Jewish populations or to convert their peoples. This policy exacerbated the divide between the Pharisees and Sadducees under later Hasmonean monarchs such as Alexander Jannaeus.[5] Those who sought the continuation of the war were led by Judah Maccabee.

On his death in battle in 160 BCE, Judah was succeeded as army commander by his younger brother, Jonathan, who was already High Priest. Jonathan made treaties with various foreign states, causing further dissent between those who merely desired religious freedom and those who sought greater power.

In 142 BCE Jonathan was assassinated by Diodotus Tryphon, a pretender to the Seleucid throne, and was succeeded by Simon Maccabee, the last remaining son of Mattathias. Simon gave support to Demetrius II Nicator, the Seleucid king, and in return Demetrius exempted the Maccabees from tribute. Simon conquered the port of Joppa and the fortress of Gezer and expelled the garrison from the Acra in Jerusalem. In 140 BCE, he was recognised by an assembly of the priests, leaders and elders as high priest, military commander and ruler of Israel. Their decree became the basis of the Hasmonean kingdom. Shortly after, the Roman senate renewed its alliance with the Hasmonean kingdom and commanded its allies in the eastern Mediterranean to do so also. Although the Maccabees won autonomy, the region remained a province of the Seleucid empire and Simon was required to provide troops to Antiochus VII Sidetes, the brother of Demetrius II. When Simon refused to give up the territory he had conquered, Antiochus took them by force.

Simon was murdered in 134 BCE by his son-in-law Ptolemy, and succeeded as high priest and king by his son John Hyrcanus I. Antiochus conquered the entire district of Judea, but refrained from attacking the Temple or interfering with Jewish observances. Judea was freed from Seleucid rule on the death of Antiochus in 129 BCE.[4]

Hasmonean rule lasted until 63 BCE, when the Roman general Pompey captured Jerusalem and subjected Israel to Roman rule, while the Hasmonean dynasty itself ended in 37 BCE when the Idumean Herod the Great became king of Israel[2] and king of the Jews[4][6].