For many interpreters, Daniel 11:36-45 shifts away from Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the persecutions that led to the Maccabean Revolt to a future, ultimate persecutions by an ultimate enemy of God. Daniel calls this the “willful king,” but sometimes he is called the antichrist. Those who take a second-century view of Daniel take the entire chapter as referring to Antiochus. Seow, for example, considers this a “recapitulation” of Antiochus’ offenses, with some general predictions that are only accurate in the most general sense, i.e., Antiochus will die (Daniel, 182).
Daniel 11:36-40 appears to say Antiochus will launch a new attack against the Ptolemaic Egypt, Judea will suffer greatly although Moab, Edom, and Ammon will be spared. Antiochus was successful in plundering all of North Africa, including Egypt, Lydia, and Ethiopia. As he is waging a successful war in the south, he will hear a rumor from the north, likely from his Syrian base, and return there. He will, however, make camp between Jerusalem and the Mediterranean Sea, where he will be killed.
The problem with this reconstruction is that it never happened. Up until verse 36, reasonable connections may be drawn between historical events and the words of Daniel. Still, after verse 36, the connections become strained at best or contradictory to the historical record at worst. Antiochus was not successful in his second invasion of Egypt, there is no record of a third invasion which was successful. He did not return home after hearing a rumor, but Rome told him to leave. He did not die in Judea but in Persia after raiding a Temple in Elymas in 168 B.C.
This is why some read this as a shift from a historical survey to an actual prophecy about “the last days.” Typically, the leader of this end-times rebellion is called the antichrist. However, Daniel never uses the word, and it is not a part of the vocabulary of apocalyptic until the Christian era. Daniel calls this person a willful king and describes his activities as defiant against God. This willful defiance is reminiscent of the king of Babylon in Isaiah 14.
Why should we begin to read Daniel as prophetic of the great end-time conflict between humanity and God? It is difficult to harmonize Daniel 11:36-45 with events in the life of Antiochus. But as John Collins suggested, Daniel 11:36-45 may be a “deliberate polemical distortion” (Daniel, 386).
It is possible the writer of Daniel 11-12 begins making a prediction of events that have not yet occurred in his lifetime but hopes they soon will (Towner, Daniel, 164, Montgomery, Daniel, 465). “The quasi-prophecy closes with an evaluative summary of Antiochus’s religious attitudes as king” (Goldingay, Daniel1, 304). Daniel 11 is expressing wishful thinking about how the current conflict might come to an end, but that prediction was mostly wrong. For example, the death of the “king” 11:45 takes place in Israel, but Antiochus died in Tabae, over a thousand miles from Israel. It is also possible the writer is generally right about the events he predicts, although not precisely so. Daniel got the “gist of things” right (Seow, Daniel, 185). The general idea that Antiochus would be killed in the near future is right, but the details are incorrect.
However, there are several indications the writer has shifted focus to future events in the passage. [NB: I am following Paul Tanner, “Daniel’s ‘King of the North’: Do We Owe Russia an Apology?” JETS 35 (1992):315-328. His commentary in the EEC series was released in March 2020] First, The subject of verse 36 is not referred to as the “king of the North” but only as “the king” or “willful king.” Normally, in chapter 11, a qualifier such as “south” or “north” is included (except in vv. 2–3, which refers to the Persian kings, and verse 27, which refers to both the kings, clearly implied the north and south).
Second, in 11:21–35, Antiochus IV served in the role of the “king of the North,” as did the other Seleucid kings before him. In v. 40, however, “the king” is apparently in contention with both the “king of the North” and the “king of the South.” This argument assumes some exegesis on verse 40, noted below.
Third, 11:35 still anticipates the “end time,” but 11:40 indicates the “end time” has finally arrived. This is also anticipated in 10:14, in which the angelic visitor says the vision which Daniel saw concerns “the days yet future” or the “latter days.” Those who hold to the Greek view see this as the end of Antiochus rather than “the end times” eschatologically.
Fourth, Daniel 12:1-3 begins with “Now at that time” and refers to a “time of great distress” in 12:1, and the mention of the resurrection in 12:2 gives the whole unit an eschatological setting.
Fifth, A leap forward in time from Daniel 11:35 to 11:36 is consistent with other leaps in time throughout the chapter. For example, 11:2-3 covers 200+ years of Persian history without comment.
Sixth, the comment in Daniel 11:36 that the king “will exalt himself above every god” is not precisely true in regard to Antiochus. Antiochus exalted Zeus on the reverse side of his coinage.
Seventh, if the description of Antiochus found in Daniel 11 is an expansion of the previous prophecies in Daniel 2, 7, and 8, then the “final kingdom” is destroyed by the kingdom of God. Antiochus does not represent the last kingdom. Rather, he is one of the last kings of the third kingdom. To a large extent, the activities of Antiochus III and IV are responsible for drawing Roman attention to the eastern regions, including Palestine. The kingdom of God did not replace Antiochus’ kingdom in any way, nor was the Maccabean revolt ultimately successful in establishing a real messianic kingdom. In fact, the rulers that followed the war are fairly corrupt high priests/kings who are nearly as evil as Jason and Menelaus were!
Is there any precedence for multiple fulfillment of prophecy? Daniel 11 seems to predict in remarkable detail the general outline of history down to about 164 B.C. If it also looks beyond the Maccabean period, then there seem to be two (or more) “fulfillments” of the prophecy. This is analogous to several Old Testament prophecies, which are literally fulfilled in the context of the prophet’s life, but also again at a later date, usually in the ministry of Christ. A possible objection to these examples is that they assume the New Testament for the second fulfillment. For this reason, we might better speak in terms of the “second application” of a prophecy.
In the case of the “sign of Immanuel” in Isaiah, there is an immediate point of contact in the prophecy (a woman in Ahaz’s household will give birth, and before the child is a few years old, the kingdom of Damascus will fall), but also a distant fulfillment/application in the birth of Christ (Matthew 1: 22-23). The call of Isaiah included a prediction of futility. The people Isaiah was sent to would be “ever hearing, but never understanding.” This text is quoted in Matthew 13 by Jesus to explain why he taught in parables a “second fulfillment/application” of the prophecy.
It seems appropriate to interpret Daniel 11:36-12:3 as referring to an ultimate, final eschatological persecution on a grand scale. Antiochus foreshadows future persecution prior to God’s decisive action in history to restore a kingdom to God’s people.
This blog post uncovers the possibility of what Daniel 11 is discussing. The willful king who will appear in the future and represents the final punishment and persecution is hard to comprehend. As I read this chapter and the blog post I am not going to lie and say that it all makes sense. However, I do understand the prophecies of Daniel have been fulfilled and still need to be fulfilled. The king being discussed is being compared to Antiochus. He represented the tyrannical rule that the anti-Christ will represent. However, Antiochus did not exalt himself above all god’s, he exalted Zeus. There are rulers throughout all history that may fit the description of Daniel’s vision. As Christians we must be aware of the danger of always looking for the fulfilment of prophecy. So many live in fear looking for their own interpretation of what it is all going to look like. We need to have trust in the plan of the Lord and that what will be fulfilled will be done in the Lord’s timing. All the prophecies throughout the Bible that have not been fulfilled will be fulfilled in the right time. This is something we should always be of but not something we worship. No matter how this all plays out we must maintain our confidence in the Lord’s timing.
The idea of the end of Daniel 11-12 being a prophecy pointing to the end if times makes complete since to me. Like you mentioned in the book of Isaiah we find this second fulfillment/ or application in both the following days but also in the distant future (Long, 2020). The birth of his own son and then the birth of the Lord Jesus. If this happens in other places in the Bible, how can we discredit it from being another prophecy that has a second application, and in this case the end times. You provide an excellent seven points on based on the writing alone, a case can be made that the prophecy is shifting to another time. Two of these points I feel as if hold a weight and make it hard to argue any differently. The first being that in your fourth point you mention the idea of resurrection. It says people will rise from the dust and go to either everlasting life or to everlasting contempt (Daniel 12:2). Now I am not a historical figure, but this did not happen in the time of Daniel. Also, with the knowledge of the New Testament we know in fact that it is still yet to come. Jesus talks about this resurrection of his people in the last days (John 6:40). If Christ is referring to a resurrection of his people, then Daniel mentioning this seems to be an obvious look towards a future that has still not happened. Your sixth point is also one that I find is very helpful in arguing that this is future prophecy yet to be fulfilled. Antiochus does not exalt himself above every god but exalts Zeus in his coins (Long 2020). He could not be the fulfillment of this part of Daniels prophecy then. I feel like to do this we would have to say that the Bible was false and therefore deny its inerrancy. If we hold to it being future, then we see a direct comparison to the anti-christ in New Testament Scripture and can keep the Bible inerrant. In the New Testament it says that the man of lawlessness (anti-christ) will make himself out to be God (2nd Thessalonians 3:3-5). This is exactly what Daniel is saying that this man will put himself above all others. Using these two points out of your seven feels as if enough reason for us to believe this section of scripture to be pointing to an end time prophecy.
It seems like Antiochus IV Epiphanes plays a major role in Daniel 11-12. In Daniel 11, Daniel refers to Antiochus IV Epiphanes as being a willful king. In Daniel 11:36-39 paint a picture of Antiochus’s character. A few main takeaways from these verses on Antiochus are the following: he exalts himself above every other god (v. 36), he magnifies himself above all (v. 37), he’ll give honor to those who acknowledge him (v. 39). In other words, Antiochus was very self-centered and only cared about his own personal gain. I found it interesting how this blog post brought up the issues with what is said in Daniel 11:36-12:3. One issue I found is that it portrays Antiochus as being self-centered which was not entirely true. Daniel 11:36 says “And the king shall do as he wills. He shall exalt himself and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak astonishing things against the God of gods. He shall prosper till the indignation is accomplished; for what is decreed shall be done.” While Antiochus IV Epiphanes did exalt himself by putting his face on coinage, he was not entirely selfish with it. In fact, on the opposite side of the coinage was an image of Zeus.
Daniel 11:40-12:3 looks at the end of time and what will happen with the kings of the north and the south. What stood out to me is Daniel 12:2-3 which says “And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky above; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever.” These two verses paint the clearest picture of what will happen in end times. Those who follow God will be righteous and will prosper, but those who turn away will be left behind.
Throughout Daniel 11, the willful king provides an understanding of how it explains the persecutions of those who were enemies of God, which Daniel calls the antichrist. The leader of this end-time rebellion is called the antichrist because, like Daniel, he rebels against God. In Daniel 10:14, the angels say the vision that Daniel saw concerns “the days yet future or the latter days.” We see that there are fulfillments of prophecy, that are not only realized in the prophet’s lifetime but also later on, typically during Christ’s ministry (Long, 2020). God was going to give Daniel some incredible information regarding powerful nations in the whole world. As Dr. Long notes, there are a couple ways in which Daniel 11:37–39 reveals what the “willful king” will accomplish up until his appointed judgment in four different ways. The initial significant concept we learn about is how he will elevate himself above other gods, including the one his fathers worshipped and the one women seek. Second, we witness him paying tribute to a god of strongholds, a god that his folks are unaware of, using gold and silver, pricey stones, and expensive presents. We see in Daniel 12:10, “Many shall purify themselves and make themselves white and be refined, but the wicked shall act wickedly. And none of the wicked shall understand, but those who are wise shall understand” (ESV). This demonstrates to us the world-power of the willful king and his persecution of God’s kingdom’s attempts to bring about the restoration of the people.
In Daniel’s prophetic visions, the willful king is depicted as a powerful ruler who abuses authority over alot of territories and kingdoms. His character is characterized by disobedience , arrogance, and a never ending pursuit of power, symbolizing the forces of evil and to God’s divine plan. I think that there some room to believe that Antiochus was the one described in the vision but take into account the person that is described is someone who is self center and full of himself though anitochus is a lot of those thing listed scripture makes it clear that antiochus did not dis every god and worshiped Zeus. In addition I believe if prophecy have not been fulfilled it could something for a later date that has not happened yet.
Your post of Daniel 11:36-12:3 digs deep into the meaning, especially whether it talks about past events or future events. You discuss how some scholars think it shifts from talking about Antiochus IV Epiphanes to a future “willful king” who might be an enemy of God. By comparing it to other Old Testament prophecies that had both immediate and future meanings, you show how Daniel 11:36-12:3 might have layers of interpretation. Your post encourages readers to think about the bigger picture of God’s plan.