Daniel 10-12 form a grand conclusion to the book of Daniel. That God has not forgotten his people is a major theme of the whole book. Still, these final three chapters present God as not only aware of his people’s suffering, but also actively moving in history to defend them when the coming great crisis comes. The Book of Daniel presents God as sovereign over the nations, including the Persian and Greek Empires. How close are Daniel 11 and History?
These final three chapters are the most detailed in terms of prophetic events in the Old Testament. This makes for difficult reading because most readers are not aware of the history of the period after the exile other than a few major key historical points. Joyce Baldwin recommends we read Daniel 11 with the Cambridge Ancient History Volume 7 in hand (Daniel, 184).
Because Daniel 11 is so detailed, most interpreters consider the chapter a prime example of vaticinium ex eventu, history written as prophecy. There are other examples of apocalyptic literature which use this method. For example, the Animal Apocalypse in 1 Enoch 85-90 is a theological interpretation of history leading up to the Maccabean Revolt. Like Daniel 11, the Animal Apocalypse tracks the relationship of the post-exilic community and the nations, including Persia and the Greeks.
The Animal Apocalypse is more detailed in the Maccabean period (1 Enoch 90:6-12). Like Daniel, a “great horn” grows on one of the lambs and rallies the sheep against the oppressors. But this is not the arrogant little horn of Daniel 8 and 9. The apocalypse likely refers to Judas Maccabees. In 1 Enoch 90:13-19, the sheep (Israel) battle the beasts (Gentiles in general, Seleucid in particular). The Lord of the Sheep intervenes in wrath; he strikes the ground with his rod, and a great sword is given to the sheep to kill the beasts of the earth. This probably refers to the conclusion of the Maccabean Revolt, but it is highly exaggerated. Unless this “Lord of the Sheep” is Judas Maccabees, this history re-told is wrong. God or a messianic figure did not directly intervene in the revolution against Antiochus IV Epiphanies. Verse 19 is the key: “A great sword was given to the sheep.” This divine passive indicates a human agent was given permission by God to successfully make way against the Gentiles (cf. a similar divine passive in Revelation 6:4).
The text of the Animal Apocalypse seems to go beyond history at this point to a prophetic vision of a future judgment of Israel’s oppressors. God intervenes to judge the nations who have oppressed his people. In 1 Enoch 90:20-27, a great throne is set up in the pleasant land (Israel), and “he sat upon it,” implying the Lord of the Sheep who struck the earth with his rod. The Lord of the Sheep then judges the sheep and their shepherds. In verse 20, the books are opened, and seven shepherds are punished for killing more sheep than they were ordered to (verse 22). These bad sheep and shepherds are cast into the fiery abyss (v. 24), and the seventy shepherds are found guilty as well and cast into the abyss to the right of the house (v. 26, presumably Gehenna to the east of the Temple).
So the Animal Apocalypse is “history written as prophecy.” Still, it shifts perspective to a future divine intervention and final judgment, which does not seem to jive with well-known history like the rest of the Apocalypse. I would suggest this the same strategy as Daniel 11. The vision accurately portrays historical events concerning the Ptolemaic and Seleucid kings up to a certain point. But in Daniel 11:40-45 the ultimate fate of Antiochus IV Epiphanes is wrong, or at least not quite right. Antiochus does not die in the way described, nor does the great prince Michael come to defend his people (12:1); those who sleep in the dust do not rise (12:2-3).
Although it is possible this is all propaganda supporting the Maccabean Revolt, I think Daniel 11:40 turns into a genuine prediction. Like the Animal Apocalypse, the writer begins to look forward to God’s intervention in history to deal with Israel’s enemies in a climactic judgment that sends some to everlasting life and others to shame and everlasting contempt (12:2). This is how apocalyptic histories work, allegorical yet accurate history up to a certain point, then the writer expresses hope for a glorious future.
Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging.
Daniel 11 and history
Reading through this blog post was difficult at some points due to the use of other apocryphal literature. But other than that, I liked the ending sentence to wrap it all up. “This is how apocalyptic histories work, allegorical yet accurate history up to a certain point, then the writer expresses hope for a glorious future (PLong).” I totally agree with this statement. These are visions that the author had that were sent from God. but, what I don’t understand is why God won’t just tell them the prophecy? I feel like I remember a couple of times where God just spoke to the prophet. But for some reason, God wanted to communicate through visions. Anyways back to what I was saying earlier. These were visions and as PLong said, these are allegories and also prophecy. So it’s as if God is killing two birds with one stone, I’m not totally sure how but these visions can be interpreted from animals to the future of a nation.
The bummer with Prophecy is that people will always accuse these accounts as history retold. The good thing is that we have proof that these writings of the prophecies were written before the events we believe to what the prophecies are about.
When it comes to some prophecies not totally being fulfilled the way they thought they were to be interpreted. I understand that it would be tough to take on that task, but I do believe that there needs to be a balance of black and white interpretation and looking at the prophecy for the main idea of what’s being presented in the vision. But there is no guidebook on how to interpret what God had said in the past.
While reading through this blog post, I was very confused most of the time and had to read it again to get a better understanding. One of the main things that was talked about the animal apocalypse. Throughout the book of Daniel, it is mentioned that within the different prophetic visions that he had, each animal represented something or someone weather it was a person or kingdom. For example, in the blog when it was talked about the Lord of the sheep in 1 Enoch. It was representing God being the judge of those who have sinned and done wrong. This brings me back to John 10 when the gatekeeper leads the sheep. “After he has gathered his own flock, he walks ahead of them, and they follow him because they know his voice. They won’t follow a stranger; they will run from him because they do not know his voice.” (John 10:4-5) Those who do not follow and trust in the Lord will not be saved and those who do trust and come through him will be saved.
“Blessed are you father, for you’ve hidden these things from the wise and discerning and revealed them to little babes.“—The Christ, Jesus of Nazareth
If you can understand the parables Jesus told regarding “leaven” and “seasoned with salt” in God’s wisdom rather than the gentile mind, then He will reveal the secrets to you. For flesh and blood cannot reveal this to whom it has not been granted. Have you left the camp to bear the reproach of Christ yet?
Go read the cost of discipleship again in Luke before you arrogantly claim to be a teacher appointed by God. You’re at risk of the being a scribe and not entering yourself, nor allowing others to enter. We as men aren’t worthy of Him unless we’ve entered through the very narrow gate. Why call Him “Lord, Lord” and not do what He says?
This part of Daniel has always been so confusing for me, I try and try to reread and understand but I still have just as hard of a time understanding this part of Daniel. One of the things that did stand out to me while I was reading this post was the great distinction that you made to the picture of historical events and the vision of the future divine intervention. Daniel 11 includes detailed historical events, like the conflict between Ptolemaic and Seleucid kings, the image of Antiochus IV Epiphanes’s fate, and Micheal, the great prince. I think that the use of Daniel 11:40 was a great verse to use. I think that this verse does a great job of talking about hope which is a common theme in the book of Daniel. It also draws in prophecy. After this post and reading through it several times, I still have a hard time understanding but I continue to try and make an effort to understand.
This section of Daniel is very complex and complicated. I think most people have “read” those chapters, but like most like myself I have just skimmed through it and missed the deep meaning and significance behind the passage. When you look at this section in Daniel and look at history, it is mind-blowing how close and accurate it is to history. In my opinion I think that this was all written before any of this happened. I think this was all truly a vision and wasn’t written after the fact. I think especially with this passage we have to remember that even though it was “written” by human hands it was all inspired by God. I think it’s dangerous to say that it was written after the fact becuase it was close. I know P-long and most people reading this are very solid in their faith and know that this doesn’t void the entire Bible, but at the same time we have to take into consideration that this Book is full of impossibilities and having Daniel predict and prophecy this accurate and this close is fully in the realm of possibilities. I know that this type of prophecy is different from most because of how close and accurate it is, but each prophet in the Bible did their own unique thing with God and his visions and I think that this could easily be the case for Daniel. I think this is one of the things that we will only know the true answer until we get to Heaven.
Personally, I love the themes of Daniel that I have learned in this class. I never really thought about them in the past, but now I understand clearly that the major themes of the book of Daniel is that God is sovereign and deeply cares about his people. These chapters show that Daniel may have thought God was not working through the exile. Daniel may have been questioning a lot of things. Similarly, doubt is increasingly prevalent today. We may believe God is not working in our trials, but as Daniel learns and teaches, God has everything under control. To me, this is extremely comforting and makes me able to cancel any doubt I experience.
As far as historical and apocalyptic writing, Daniel is often understood as eschatological in nature. The question is whether or not Daniel’s dreams and visions refer to future events or historical events (according to modern day). Many refer the interpretations of Daniel to the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who raided the temple and did a myriad of terrible sacrilegious things. Long mentions this being a possibility in previous posts as well as in class. Jesus himself says things that makes it seem like he believed the Abomination of Desolation has not been set up. Mark 13 speaks a lot to this topic. Verse 14 specifically is where Jesus mentions presumably the same event in Daniel. “When you see ‘the abomination that causes desolation’ standing where it does not belong—let the reader understand—then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains” (Mark 13:14). This definitely seems like Jesus was saying the events in Daniel have not happened yet. I think Long resolves this well by saying that this is just how apocalyptic history works. Daniel was reporting what had been going on and then is hopeful for the future.
Daniel 11 being complicated feels like quite the understatement. So many moving parts all at once, but this view of Daniel 11 being “history written as prophecy” does help me recenter instead of rocking my evangelical view of scripture. The ESVSB has a rather helpful chart looking through these empires moving, splitting and shifting, as well as the tracing the lines of rulers after Alexander the great, including Antiochus IV Epiphanes in the center next to Cleopatra I for perspective (1611-1612). I think looking at 11:1-39 as historical, and 11:40-45 as further future helps to reconcile the faulty prediction of A4E’s death. If it is further future prediction than historical prophecy, we are able to say that this future ruler will be the antichrist and God is the one who defeats him (Longman III, 130). I can see how this chapter alone gets rather complicated if we view it as strict prophecy, then Daniel gets something wrong at the end, and I have not been familiar with the view of apocalyptic literature being used as telling history. This view is eye opening and I think it will help to see a bigger picture by the time that John will have written Revelation.
The last two chapters of Daniel are really interesting and full of little tidbits al over the place, some of which correct that seem to be written about after the fact, while others are some off the mark that it must have been before and be guess. Other stuff is far to on the nose and close to the truth that most scholars have come to conclusion that it was written after the thing that it was predicted. Most scholars will agree that most prophecy will somewhat murky at the time before it is completed. For example, look at the Jews, they believed that the Messiah was going to be a revolutionary leader, rescuing them from the oppression from the Roman Empire. While the truth was that the Messiah was going to save from sin. For most real prophecies, when they come true them make sense because people now the event to cross examine with the actual prophecy and be then have all the facts while the prophet only had what they were told and shown. Another thing to remember is that some of Daniel’s visions have only been partly completed because the vision ends with the Ancient one ruling which has not happened yet. And not to mention that have a been a lot people in history who could have been the little horn, who is replaced by the Ancient. Therefore it might be that the vision have not happened yet.
The three last chapters of Daniels give warrant for a few second glances and a little bit of brain rattle, nonetheless, this is a rather important part of the Bible. In the blog post, Dr. Long emphasizes the importance of using the book of 1 Enoch to better understand what these chapters are portraying to us. The interpretation of Daniel 11 and the Animal Apocalypse in 1 Enoch reveals a common trend in apocalyptic literature where historical events are presented as prophecy. Both texts depict the post-exilic community’s interactions with various nations, notably Persia and Greece. In the Animal Apocalypse, the focus shifts to the Maccabean Revolt, portraying Judas Maccabees as a symbolic figure. The exaggerated divine intervention, with a great sword given to the sheep, likely refers to the revolt’s conclusion. However, discrepancies arise, such as the divine passive in the Animal Apocalypse, indicating human agency, contrary to the historical account. The text also extends beyond historical events to prophesy a future judgment of Israel’s oppressors, emphasizing divine intervention and final judgment. Similarly, Daniel 11 exhibits accuracy in historical events until a certain point, with inaccuracies in the fate of Antiochus IV Epiphanes. While some argue these discrepancies serve as propaganda for the Maccabean Revolt, the possibility of genuine predictions arises. Daniel 11:40 and the concluding chapters express anticipation for God’s intervention in history, culminating in a climactic judgment with outcomes of everlasting life or shame and contempt. Apocalyptic histories thus blend allegorical accuracy with hopeful visions of a glorious future.