Daniel Chapter Eight
Daniel 8:1-8
CHAPTER EIGHT
II. LOCKING HORNS--Dan 8:1-27
a. THE GOAT AND THE RAM
TEXT: Dan 8:1-8
1 In the third year of the reign of king Belshazzar a vision appeared unto me, even unto me, Daniel, after that which appeared unto me at the first.
2 And I saw in the vision; now it was so, that when I saw, I was in Shushan the palace, which is in the province of Elam; and I saw in the vision, and I was by the river Ulai.
3 Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last.
4 I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; and no beasts could stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will, and magnified himself.
5 And as I was considering, behold, a he-goat came from the west over the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.
6 And he came to the ram that had the two horns, which I saw standing before the river, and ran upon him in the fury of his power.
7 And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with anger against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns; and there was no power in the ram to stand before him; but he cast him down to the ground, and trampled upon him; and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.
8 And the he-goat magnified himself exceedingly; and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and instead of it there came up four notable horns toward the four winds of heaven.
QUERIES
a. Where is Shushan in the province of Elam?
b. What is the significance of the last horn of the ram coming up higher than its first horn?
c. Why was the he-goat moved with anger against the ram?
PARAPHRASE
In the third year of the reign of king Belshazzar, I, Daniel, had a second vision from the Lord, somewhat like the first. In this vision I found myself at Susa, the capital of the province of Elam, standing beside the Ulai River. As I was looking around, I saw a ram with two horns standing on the river bank; these two horns were large, but one was larger than the other and this larger of the two grew up last! The ram butted everything out of its way as it butted toward the west, the north and the south, and there was no one who could stand against it or render aid to its victims. This ram did as he pleased and became very great. And as I contemplated what all this might mean, lo, a he-goat came from the west, traversing his course of progress over all the earth so swiftly that he hardly even touched the ground. This he-goat had one very great horn between his eyes. He butted furiously at the two-horned ram, and the farther he came, the angrier he became toward the ram. He charged into the ram and broke off both his horns and when the ram was helpless the he-goat knocked it down and stamped it with his feet and none could deliver the ram from being destroyed by the he-goat. The he-goat then became proud and powerful, but suddenly, at the apex of his greatness, his horn was broken. In its place grew four strong horns pointing toward the four corners of the world.
COMMENT
Dan 8:1-2 . . . A VISION APPEARED TO ME . . . IN SHUSHAN . . . BY THE RIVER ULAI . . . Elam was a country situated on the east side of the Tigris river opposite Babylonia in a mountainous region. Its population was made up of a variety of tribes. Their language, different from the Sumerian, Semitic, and Indo-European tongues, was written in cuneiform script, It has not yet been deciphered to any great extent. Elam was one of the earliest civilizations. In Sumerian inscriptions it was called Numma (high mountain people), which term became Elamtu in Akkadian texts; in classical literature it was known as Susiana, the Greek name for Susa, the capital city of Elam. The river Ulai runs through the province of Elam, flowing on through the city of Susa, into the Tigris-Euphrates.
Why did Daniel deem it necessary to mention these places? Because Shushan was later to become the summer capital of the Persian Empire. When the vision appeared to Daniel, nothing concerning the future importance of this site was known. But since the fortunes of Persia were involved, the future center of Persian life and activity was the best background. The yet unknown Sushan no doubt needed to be located for many of Daniel’s readers—which certainly bears witness to the predictive nature of the Scriptures.
Archaeological effort in the last part of the 1880’s uncovered in Shushan the great palace of King Xerxes (486–465 B.C.) in which Queen Esther lived. Many Jews lived here in the captivities and became prominent in the affairs of the city as the books of Esther and Nehemiah show.
Dan 8:3-4 . . . BEHOLD, THERE STOOD BEFORE THE RIVER A RAM WHICH HAD TWO HORNS . . . ONE WAS HIGHER THAN THE OTHER . . . HE DID ACCORDING TO HIS WILL . . . MAGNIFIED HIMSELF . . . The ram is Medo-Persit (cf. Dan 8:20). The two horns are the two component parts of the empire, Media and Persia. The taller one came up last, which coincides with the history of this empire when Persia eventually became supreme and assimilated the Medes. How does the ram typify Persia? The ram is an emblem of princely power (cf. Eze 34:17; Eze 30:18; and Dan 8:20). The contrast between a ram and a he-goat is remarkably close to the relationship between Persia and Greece. The ram likes to butt things and yet there is something of a staid and sober character to it and not quite as flamboyant as the he-goat.
The history of Persia’s rapid conquest of the world is symbolized by the butting of the ram toward the west, north and south. It did not butt toward the east because she herself was the eastern most part of her empire. The “three” points of the compass agree with the “three” ribs in the mouth of the bear (chapter 7). The statement that “no beasts could stand before him” refers to the imagery of chapter 7 also and the command there, “Arise and devour much flesh.” There was little resistance to the Persian conquest of the world until Philip of Macedon (Alexander the Great’s father) of whom we have spoken earlier. The phrase “he did as he pleased” was in a special sense true of the Persian Empire. Whatever rulers and people wanted in the course of their conquests, that they did, no matter how irregular or strange it might seem to others.
That the Persian conquerors “magnified” themselves may be exemplified by this historical sketch from Archaeology and Our O.T. Contemporaries, by James Kelso, pub. by Zondervan; pgs. 167–172,
In Isaiah God speaks of Cyrus as His shepherd and His anointed i.e., Messiah. These two terms designate Cyrus as a king chosen by God to be His agent in world history. And Cyrus was, indeed, one of history’s most significant monarchs. Look at this abridged summary of the Persian empire which Cyrus created. For the first time in history the Persians give us a world empire dominated by Aryans. The previous Hamitic and Semitic world empires had made a tragedy of international government. But Persia brought in a veritable millennium for subject peoples. These Persians were virtually an unknown people until Cyrus in one generation made them masters of the world. Cyrus was at least as great a military genius as Alexander.
To create his empire Cyrus had to capture about twenty strong enemies including Lydia where Croesus, the richest man in the world, ruled Asia Minor; and Babylonia, the greatest of the ancient powers before Cyrus. He ruled from the Aegean Sea on the west to the Jaxartes River and the Himalayas on the east. All of these he consolidated into an empire that lasted two centuries. This is the final test of military power and it is here where Alexander was a total failure as his empire fell to pieces immediately upon his death.
Under Darius the Persian empire increased somewhat and was then twice the size of any previous world empire. Darius governed from the Balkans and Egypt on the west well into India on the east. The Persian empire ran for two centuries and gave the world the longest peace in history until the Pax Romana. About the middle of the Persian empire, Nehemiah, the last great political figure in the Old Testament, appeared. The Persian and the Roman empires were far more similar than formerly realized.
The Persian peace brought in one of the greatest periods of commercial expansion. They introduced an international language (Aramaic), rapid communications and good roads. They also put coinage on an international basis. In the sphere of politics Persia was the first world government to attempt to bring different races and nationalities under a central government which assured to all the rights and privileges of government as well as its burdens. They allowed the various subject races and existing civilizations to go on side by side with their own. They even permitted the Jews to coin their own money! Furthermore Persia interfered as little as possible in local government matters. Alexander himself found the Persian system of government so excellent that he took over almost bodily the Persian policy of world empire and simply grafted on to it his own Hellenistic policies.
The Persians’ respect for truth and honor and their humane and chivalrous character was the secret of their nation’s success. Their kings might lack these qualities, but the subject states of the empire seldom suffered seriously as most of the Persian subordinates were true to Persian ideals. The Persian’s diplomatic and commercial language was Aramaic, not Persian! Thus Aramaic became one of the world’s influential languages. Its inscriptions are found as far east as India. In Roman times the Levant had a renaissance of this language, which was then called Syriac, and it replaced Greek. The Persians were the founders of religious freedom on a world basis. Note that the Jews speak well only of the Persian empire. Rome returned to many of the Persian practices.
Many of the features of good government which these Persians introduced are those which we have often thought of as America’s unique contribution to world history. We should be doing far more than we are in the light of over two thousand years of international history and especially in 1900 years of the teachings of Jesus Christ. The Persians deserve far more credit in world history than they have received. Unfortunately, too often the Greeks have been their historians, and your bitter enemy seldom speaks well of you.
The Ram and the He-Goat
The Death of Alexander the Great
Now let us return to the days of Cyrus. In antiquity the nations who were successful in war brought home to their capital city the chief idols of the conquered peoples as the major prize of victory. Thus mighty Babylon held the world’s largest collection of gods in antiquity. When Cyrus conquered that empire he completely reversed this policy. He told all the conquered peoples to come to Babylon and take home their national gods. With Israel there was no idol, but the temple vessels taken away by Nebuchadnezzar were returned to Jerusalem in the care of Shesh-bazzar, fourth son of Jehoiachin. Under Darius, the Persian government even helped bear the expense of erecting Israel’s new temple.
Dan_8:5-8 . . . BEHOLD, A HE-GOAT . . . SMOTE THE RAM . . . THE GREAT HORN WAS BROKEN . . . THERE CAME UP FOUR NOTABLE HORNS . . . The buck-goat is a fitting symbol for the empire of Greece (cf. Dan 8:21) for it represents ruggedness and power (cf. Zec 10:3). It represents sure-footedness and quickness. In 1Ma 1:3 Alexander’s conquests are thus described: “He went through to the ends of the earth and took spoils of a multitude of nations; and the earth was quite before him,” His conquests were so rapid the he-goat is represented as “not touching the ground,” or literally, skimming over the earth. He came from ma-arabh (where the sun sets—the west). This he-goat had a “horn of conspicuousness’” (a prominent horn) between its eyes. This prominent horn represents Alexander the Great.
The “river” is significant for it symbolizes the historic clash of the Greeks and the Persians at the Granicus river where they met in their first Asiatic war. The “great anger” points to the cry for vengeance from the Greek city states after years of assaults across the Aegean sea by the Persian hordes in 490–480 B.C. and battle at Marathon, Salamis, Plataea and Athens. When Darius landed near the plain of Marathon in 490 B.C. the city of Athens dispatched a runner, Pheidippides, to Sparta to summon long-pledged aid. He covered 140 miles in two days, but he raced in vain. For the famed fighters of Sparta, celebrating a festival of Apollo, could not go to war during that holy time. Athens hastily mobilized militia, and her general Miltiades gave the order: “Take food and march.” Miltiades, by shrewdly outwitting and outflanking his foe (the Persian army) and by courageously charging into the ranks of the Persians (Merodotus wrote, “They were the first Greeks . . . who charged their enemies at a run . . .”) defeated Darius at Marathon. Most Greeks hailed Marathon as glorious proof of their invincibility. But Themistocles, an Athenian statesman, warned that the Persians would return. Like Churchill in Britain between world wars, Themistocles went unheeded by the masses and was mocked by political opponents. The rich fought his plan for a tax-financed navy, preferring the self-supported citizen army. Across the Aegean, meanwhile, the Persian empire was conscripting men, ships, and arms for a land-and-sea invasion of Greece. In 481, Xerxes, successor to his father’s throne, massed three forces on the Asian shore of the Hellespont. Athens Sparta, Corinth, and Aegina responded by forming a defensive league that would eventually include 31 city-states. But most Greeks, awed by Persian might, favored neutrality or even alliance with the invaders.
Xerxes bridged the channel with boats. His Egyptian subjects, renowned as the world’s best ropemakers, produced the great bridge cables (a sample of their craft has been excavated in an Egyptian quarry: rope 18 inches in diameter attached to a 70-ton block of stone). Sod covered the mile-long plank roadway and high screens lined it so that animals crossing on it would not shy at the seething current. Across the Hellespont in 480 tramped an army that ancients numbered in the millions. Some 1000 ships paralleled the army’s march, landing men and supplies as the invaders headed westward through Thrace, Macedonia, and Thessaly. The fleet traversed a canal Xerxes had ordered cut through the Mount Athos peninsula. He must have paid for the work in gold darics (named for Darius). A 300-coin cache has been found there. The Persians lived off the land. But unlike the Greeks, they were great meat eaters, so their fleet maintained food dumps holding beasts for slaughter and stores of salt meat of every kind. The depots also had piles of papyri for paper-work—a military feature alien to Greeks.
This massive army consisted of Persian warriors in leather jerkins and fish-scale armor, high-booted Phrygians; Mysians bearing sharpened stakes, wooden-helmeted men of the Caucasus, Scythians in pointed caps, Iranians behind tall wicker shields, an Arabian camel corps, ass-drawn chariots from India—and Ethopians in lionskins who brandished stone-headed clubs and spears tipped with gazelle horn. The exotic horde marched on toward Athens, drinking rivers dry, ravaging the land. But this slave army, said Herodotus, marched under the lash. And ahead lay a pass called Thermopylae, defended by a band of freemen.
Xerxes, enthroned near the pass to watch his men pour through, laughed at a scout’s report of vain Greek warriors bathing and preening on the eve of battle. But a Greek, serving Xerxes, heard the report and understood: the troops were Spartans, ritualistically preparing to die. “O king!” he exclaimed, “now you are face to face with the most valiant men in Hellas.” Aeschylus, veteran of the battle in the Salamis Strait, re-created it in his play The Persians. He told how the Greeks’ bronze-sheathed rams smashed into the Persians “till hulls rolled over, and the sea itself was hidden, strewn with their wreckage, dyed with blood of men. The dead lay thick on all the reefs and beaches, and flight broke out . . .”
Bearing news of the Salamis disaster, messengers sped across the Aegean, rode the Royal Road from Sardis to Susa, and galloped along the highways that linked the satrapies of the Persian empire. “Neither snow, nor rain, nor heat, nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds,” wrote Herodotus, which centuries later became the official motto of the U.S. Post Office. The following summer the Persian messengers had more bad news to spread: An army of some 100,000 Greeks had wiped out the last of the invaders in a battle at Plataea in the hills of Thebes.
And the rest belongs to the history of Alexander the Great, the he-goat whose armies went about their task of conquest as though it were being done to avenge a great wrong: His anger grew to the point where it was nothing less than rage—Alexander was bent upon obliterating every vestige of Persian control in the earth.
Alexander and his men spent the winter of 331 B.C. luxuriating in the splendor of Persepolis. One evening, encouraged by his drunken colleagues, Alexander burned the palaces of Xerxes in revenge against that king, who had put Athens to the torch 150 years before. “Avenge Greece,” cried Alexander, hurling the first firebrand. “As soon as sleep had restored his senses,” wrote Curtius, “Alexander regretted what he had done.”
Half the peoples were already subjugated. But to win all Persia, Alexander would have to conquer the rest. His greatest efforts were still to come. In the spring of 330 B.C. Alexander marched north to Ecbatana, Persia’s summer capital, now Hamadan. His object: the capture of Darius himself. But the Persian fled through the Caspian Gates, a pass over the Elburz Mountains. The Macedonian pursued him, averaging an extraordinary 36 miles a day. When he caught the straggling baggage train, he found Darius dead, murdered by his own disillusioned generals. King of Persia at last, Alexander marched to Zadracarta, modern Gorgan, to assume not only the title but the pomp of an oriental monarch.
At the Beas River, just inside present India, Alexander faced a real mutiny for the first time. His homesick men, unnerved by the fierce fight against Porus, concerned by reports of even greater armies ahead, refused to go on. Alexander summoned his officers and tried to rally them. Silence greeted him. Then Coenus, a faithful general, rose, removed his helmet, and addressed Alexander: “O king, I speak not for those officers present, but for the men . . . Those that survive yearn to return to their families, to enjoy while they yet live the riches you have won for them . . . A noble thing, O king, is to know when to stop.” Angered and disappointed by the speech, Alexander sulked in his tent for three days. When as last he bowed to the will of his men, they rejoiced. “Alexander,” they said, “has allowed us, but no other, to defeat him.” He led his men back to the Jhelum to begin the journey home.
As Arrian wrote, “Alexander had no small or mean conceptions, nor would ever have remained contented with any of his possessions . . . but would always have searched far beyond . . . being always the rival, if of no other, yet of himself.” As he turned from further conquests in India it is reported that he “wept because there were no more worlds to conquer.” He died in Persepolis at the age of 32.
Idolized by his men, hailed as divine in lands he won, Alexander passed into the legends of three continents. Central Asia worshipped him as Iskander, founder of cities (one, Bucephala, honored his horse). Chiefs in Turkistan claim descent from him; Afghan mothers frighten naughty children with tales of Iskander. Persians called him son of Darius; Egyptians, son of the last Pharaoh, Nectanebo. Ethiopia made him a saint, and Islam enrolled him as a prophet. Mogul art shows him in a diving bell seeking the sea’s secrets. Medieval Europe depicted him as a knight of chivalry. Romans, first to call Alexander “the Great,” held themselves heirs to his empire and ambitions. Augustus wore Alexander’s head on a signet ring, emulated his deeds and divinity. Even Buddha owes his image to Alexander’s march into the Orient. Inspired by statues Greeks brought to Bandhara, sculptors created Buddha in the image of Apollo, but added to his forehead the Oriental third eye, which emits spiritual light.
He won an empire covering more than one and one half million square miles. He had mapped unknown territory, built cities, opened trade routes, stimulated the exchange of ideas. From the Mediterranean to the Hindu Kush, Greek became the lingua franca of court and commerce.
His vast realm survived for only a few years as the Diadochi—his “successors”—fought each other for power. Dan_8:8 and its “four notable horns” coming up in the place of the great horn (Alexander) are parallel to the four heads of the “leopard” of chapter 7 and represent the four-way division of Alexander’s empire between Ptolemy, Antigonus, Cassander and Lysimachus (see our comments on Dan 7:4-6).
QUIZ
1. Why did Daniel mention all the geographical locations in Dan 8:2?
2. Whom does the ram symbolize and how extensive was his empire?
3. What is the significance of the ram “doing as he pleased?”
4. Who is represented by the “he-goat?”
5. Why is the “he-goat” represented as moving with anger against the ram?
6. How extensive was the empire of the “he-goat?”
7. What is represented by the “four notable horns?”
Daniel 8:9-17
b. THE GREAT HORN AND THE RIGHTEOUS PRINCE
TEXT: Dan 8:9-17
9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the glorious land.
10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and some of the host and of the stars it cast down to the ground, and trampled upon them.
11 Yea, it magnified itself, even to the prince of the host; and it took away from him the continual burnt-offering, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.
12 And the host was given over to it together with the continual burnt-offering through transgression; and it cast down truth to the ground, and it did its pleasure and prospered.
13 Then I heard a holy one speaking; and another holy one said unto that certain one who spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the continual burnt-offering, and the transgression that maketh desolate, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?
14 And he said unto me, unto two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
15 And it came to pass, when I, even I Daniel, had seen the vision, that I sought to understand it; and, behold, there stood before me as the appearance of a man.
16 And I heard a man’s voice between the banks of the Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.
17 So he came near where I stood; and when he came, I was affrighted, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man; for the vision belongeth to the time of the end.
QUERIES
a. Why does the “little horn” come forth from the four?
b. Who is the “host” and the “prince of the host?”
c. What is the “time of the end?”
PARAPHRASE
And from one of the four notable horns, came one little horn growing slowly at first, soon becoming very strong, and it extended itself toward the south and the east and toward the glorious, holy land of God’s people, Canaan. This arrogant horn extended its evil power against the hosts of God’s people and some of them were slain, that is, many of God’s heavenly saints were killed. Yes, this presumptuous and boastful horn even exalted itself over God himself taking it upon himself to prohibit the daily sacrifices in the temple of the Jews which God had commanded to be offered, and the horn desecrated the temple until it was defiled beyond use. And God allowed some of the Jews and His temple to come under the power of this horn because of the apostasy of some who agreed to the defilement of the temple by the horn. This despicable horn carried on such an immoral paganization of the holy land that justice, truth, and righteousness seemed to vanish and evil seemed to be triumphing. Just then I heard two angels talking one another. One said to the other, How long will it be until the daily sacrifices are restored again? How long until the desecration of the temple is avenged and God’s people triumph? The other replied, a time just short of seven years, that is 2300 days, will transpire and then the temple of God will be purified of pagan defilement. And as I was trying to understand the meaning of this vision, suddenly a being in the appearance of a man stood before me and I heard a man’s voice from across the river Ulai. The voice said, Gabriel, make this prophet understand the vision he has just received. So Gabriel started toward me. But as he came near I was too frightened to stand up and I fell down with my face to the ground. He said, son of man, you must understand that the events you have seen in your vision will not take place until near the end of the old covenant dispensation.
The Little Horn Developed
COMMENT
Dan 8:9-10 . . . CAME FORTH A LITTLE HORN . . . WAXED GREAT, EVEN TO THE HOST OF HEAVEN . . . The description given here and in subsequent verses of this chapter is so definite and specific that the “little horn” here can be no other than Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) and his immediate predecessors (The Seleucids). Ptolemy I, one of the four who succeeded Alexander to his empire, appointed Seleucus Nicator (312–280 B.C.) to administer Syria for him. There followed almost a century and a half of war between the Ptolomies and the Seleucids for sovereignty in Syria and Palestine. This is discussed at length in chapter eleven of this work. In this text all the Seleucid rulers between Seleucus Nicator and Antiochus the IV are passed over with the phrase, “came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south . . . and east . . . and the glorious land.” Dan_8:10 brings the reader abruptly to Antiochus Epiphanes (about 175–165 B.C.).
It is important to note that the “little horn” here grows out of one of the four which definitely belong to the Grecian Empire. It cannot, therefore, be the same little horn of chapter 7 which overthrew three of the ten which were definitely connected to the fourth beast. The Scofield Reference Bible declares this passage (Dan 8:10-14) to be the “most difficult in prophecy.” While it refers the passage to Antiochus IV, still it connects the horn of chapter 8 to the horn of chapter 7 inferring they are one and the same. Such seems clearly contradictory in view of the fact that the Scofield Reference Bible declares the fourth beast of chapter 7 to be the Roman Empire.
The “glorious land” can be none other than the Holy Land, Palestine. This horn “waxed great” or extended its power south and east from Syria, even into Palestine, to the very borders of Egypt. The “host of heaven” and the “stars” are simply God’s covenant people (and not any special group of Jewish priests or rulers). One may find a number of references or figurative parallels where God’s saints of the O.T. are likened unto the stars of heaven (Jer 33:22; Dan 12:3, etc.); they are also referred to as the “hosts” (cf. Exo 7:4; Exo 12:41).
The terrible, presumptuous deeds of Antiochus IV against the saints of God were in reality arrogant wickednesses against Heaven itself.
Dan 8:11-12 . . . IT MAGNIFIED ITSELF, EVEN TO THE PRINCE OF THE HOST . . . AND THE HOST WAS GIVEN OVER TO IT . . . This little horn (Antiochus Epiphanes) arrogated to himself the prerogatives of Almighty God. He actually considered himself equal to God and commanded that likenesses of himself be placed in the temple of the Jews and worshipped as god. That this Syrian ruler actually forbade the Jews to offer their regular sacrifices is confirmed by 1Ma 1:44-47 : “And the king sent letters by the hand of messengers unto Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, that they should follow laws strange to the land, and should forbid whole burnt offerings and sacrifice and drink offerings in the sanctuary; and should profane the sabbaths and feasts, and pollute the sanctuary and them that were holy.” Antiochus did not actually tear down the temple, but he desecrated it to such a point, even commanding that a swine be slain on the temple altar, that it was not fit for use. He also substituted an altar to Jupiter for the altar of burnt offering. This was the crowning abomination.
Great numbers of the people of Israel consorted with Antiochus and welcomed his Hellenization of their culture. Many of them were given over to transgression. God permitted it—He did not cause it! The same principle is evident here as is announced in 2Th 2:11-12. If men wish to be deluded it is in the economy of God’s creating them as free, moral agents, that they shall be permitted to be so deluded. If, however, they wish to know the truth and love the truth, God will always make it possible that they shall have the opportunity to know it and practice it.
This pagan ruler “cast down truth to the ground,” and all descriptions of evil flourished and prospered for a time. Every copy of Jewish scriptures that could be found was burned and many faithful Jews were slain. One need only read I Maccabees to know of the terrible paganization and attendant persecution of this time. (For more detailed information concerning the reign of Antiochus IV see our comments on Dan 11:20 ff)
Dan 8:13-14 . . . HOW LONG . . . THE TRANSGRESSION THAT MAKETH DESOLATE . . . UNTO TWO THOUSAND AND THREE HUNDRED EVENINGS AND MORNINGS . . . God sent His angels into the presence of Daniel to discuss the matter under consideration so that Daniel might through their words arrive at an authoritative interpretation. These are things angels desire to look into (cf. 1Pe 1:10-12). One angel seems to be more knowledgeable than the other concerning the times and seasons of God’s counsels, (see our Special Study on Angels at the end of chapter 10).
There are two principal interpretations of Dan 8:14: (a) it means 1150 days; those who adopt this view insist that the prophecy is related to the daily morning and evening sacrifices and 2300 such sacrifices would therefore be offered on 1150 days. They also connect this to the horn of chapter 7, especially with Dan 7:25, which they contend is 3½ years (a time, times and half a time) and 1150 days is nearly equivalent to 3½ years. It should be obvious, however, that 1150 days do not equal 3½ years, even when these years are regarded as comprising only. 360 days each or a total of 1260 days. It should also be obvious that the “horn” of chapter 7 and the “horn” of chapter 8 are different “horns.” (b) it means 2300 days and is probably a derivative of Genesis 1, where an “evening and a morning” are reckoned as a full day. In the O.T. an expression such, as 40 days and 40 nights does not mean 20 days, nor does 3 days and 3 nights mean either 6 days or 1½ days; it means 3 days. Keil says: “A Hebrew reader could not possibly understand the period of time 2300 evening-mornings of 2300 half days or 1150 whole days, because evening and morning at the creation constituted not the half but the whole day.” So we must understand the phrase as meaning 2300 whole days.
But how are the 2300 days to be applied to the history of Antiochus? The number 2300 shows that the period must be defined in round numbers (the number 10 and any multiple of it is an incomplete number or a “round” number and should not be taken literally), measuring only nearly the actual time. This conforms to all genuine prophecy because genuine prophecy never makes mantic prediction of exact days and hours its primary focus. The period (2300 days) are undoubtedly referring to the period of Antiochus’ abominable treatment of the Jews. This began in the year 171 B.C., one year before his return from his second expedition to Egypt. In this year began the laying waste of the sanctuary. The termination would then be the death of Antiochus (164 B.C.). The 2300 days cover a period of six years and about 4 months. Keil believes that the number (being a little short of 7 years) possesses a symbolic meaning, namely, not quite the full duration of a period of divine judgment. It does seem to be used to cover approximately the period of the persecution under Antiochus. Leupold says: “The fact that it is expressed in days reminds the troubled Israelites that the Lord will not let this period extend a day beyond what they can bear.” Thus when these days (the period that is not even a full period of divine judgment) shall have come to an end, “then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” This makes it very plain that what is really marked by the 2300 days is the period of the desecration of the sanctuary.
Dan 8:15-17 . . . I SOUGHT TO UNDERSTAND . . . GABRIEL, MAKE THIS MAN TO UNDERSTAND . . . THE VISION BELONGETH TO THE TIME OF THE END . . . Daniel knows only, so far, that the overthrow of the sanctuary and the sufferings of the saints were not to last even through an entire divine judgment period. But he seeks to understand more. And at the mere desire (not even an audible prayer was made by Daniel) lo, an angel of God stands before him. Here and in Dan 9:21 Gabriel is named; in Dan 10:13 ff. Michael is named. The only O.T. book in which angels receive names is Daniel, and Gabriel and Michael are the only two who are named. This is so in the N.T., Luk 1:19; Luk 1:26; Jud 1:9.
The presence of perfect holiness before Daniel causes him, sinful man, to tremble with fear and he falls upon his face as if to hide. The vision is definitely to be understood because it has to do with the time of the end! This should indicate immediately that it is not speaking of the end of all time, the Second Advent of Christ, for the N.T. plainly states that “no one knoweth the day nor the hour . . .” and, “in a time that ye think not; the Son of man cometh . . .” Furthermore, there is a specific key to contextual interpretation of this “time of the end” and that is Dan 8:19, “the latter part of the indignation.” It can only refer to the end of time when afflictions or indignation are to be permitted upon Israel. IT IS THE END OF THE O.T. PERIOD AND THE USHERING IN OF THE NEW! This “time of the end” reaches only to the end of those special afflictions that are to come on the people of the Jews before the Messianic period, and which are made the subject of prophecy because of their importance to the preparation of the covenant people for the coming of the Messiah and the establishment of His kingdom which is gloriously symbolized in the prophets as the time of God’s victory over His enemies and the restoring of the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem. The view that the “time of the end” here has reference to the great tribulation, supposedly to occur during the latter half of the 70th week is utterly without exegetical support from this context or any combination of texts!
QUIZ
1. Why is that “little horn” different from the “little horn” of chapter 7?
2. What is the “glorious land?”
3. How did the horn “wax great” against the stars and the prince?
4. How did it take away the continual burnt-offering?
5. What is the meaning of, “the host was given over to it?”
6. What period of time is indicated by 2300 evenings and mornings?
7. Why is the “time of the end” not the end of time?
Daniel 8:18-27
c. GRIEVOUS TIMES AND RETRIBUTION
TEXT: Dan 8:18-27
18 Now as he was speaking with me, I fell into a deep sleep with my face toward the ground; but he touched me, and set me upright.
19 And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the latter time of the indignation; for it belongeth to the appointed time of the end.
20 The ram which thou sawest, that had the two horns, they are the kings of Media and Persia.
21 And the rough he-goat is the king of Greece: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
22 And as for that which was broken, in the place whereof four stood up, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not with his power.
23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.
24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power; and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper and do his pleasure; and he shall destroy the mighty ones and the holy people.
25 And through his policy he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and in their security shall he destroy many; he shall also stand up against the prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.
26 And the vision of the evenings and mornings which hath been told is true: but shut thou up the vision; for it belongeth to many days to come.
27 And I, Daniel, fainted, and was sick certain days; then I rose up, and did the king’s business: and I wondered at the vision, but none understood it.
QUERIES
a. How shall the “king of fierce countenance” have mighty power, but not by his own power? Dan 8:24
b. How is he to be “broken without hand?” Dan 8:25
c. Why was Daniel told to “shut up the vision?” Dan 8:26
PARAPHRASE
The more the angel spoke to me the more I became upset with my moral sinfulness, until I actually fainted. But the angel simply touched me and I awoke from my faint and had strength to stand up again. Then the angel said to me, Lo, I am revealing to you the things that shall happen in the final period of the Babylonian captivity (the period of God’s anger against His covenant-breaking people). Every appointed time of God has an end—and so His anger will end too! The ram which you saw in this vision having two horns represents the two-headed kingdom of Medo-Persia. The shaggy he-goat represents the empire of Greece and the tall horn which grows between its eyes represents its most illustrious emperor, Alexander the Great. When you saw this great horn break off, and four smaller horns replacing it, this indicates that the Grecian empire will break into four sections at the death of this great king with four separate kings, none of them as great as the first king. Toward the end of these four kingdoms, when the apostate Jews, who love the transgressions of paganism, have grown exceedingly wicker, a fierce, wicked and adamant king, who shall also be a master of deceit and cunning, shall arise from this background to rule over the covenant people. His power shall be tremendous, but that, is only because God, in His providence, is permitting him to have such power for a season. Prospering wherever he turns, his power to destroy powerful opponents and the saints of God will seem remarkable. And by his cunning he shall be successful in catching many of his opponents off guard as they bask in false security. He will destroy them with craftiness; so great will he think himself to be that he will even defy the Almighty God; when his end comes, it will be apparent that he was brought down by Almighty God, and not by mortal men. Now this remarkable and unique vision is true—do not doubt that Daniel. Preserve this revelation safely for, although it has to do with the end times of the Mosaic dispensation, these things are still in the distant future. So overcome was I, that for some days I was sick before I could continue the king’s business. And though the contents of the vision and its interpretation remained firmly fixed in my mind, it greatly perplexed me and others to whom I related it.
COMMENT
Dan 8:18-19 . . . I FELL INTO A DEEP SLEEP . . . BUT . . . HE SET ME UPRIGHT . . . KNOW . . . THE LATTER TIME OF THE INDIGNATION . . . Daniel’s awareness of the great gulf between the sinfulness of mortals and the perfect holiness of angelic beings was so overcoming that he apparently fainted into unconsciousness. But the supernatural ministration of the angelic being was sufficient to restore Daniel to wakefulness, and strength to stand up and receive the revelation from God the messenger had to relate.
This message had to do with the closing days of the “indignation.” Now that term “indignation” (or “wrath”) can only refer to the captivities of the covenant people of the O.T. (Israel’s ‘captivity by Assyria, and Judah’s captivity by Babylon and her successors, Persia, Greece). For scriptural confirmation of this see Isa 10:5;
Isa 10:25; Isa 26:20, etc. The term “indignation” is a technical term used by the prophets to designate the wrath of God and His displeasure executed in giving the covenant people over to captivity, or to oppression by their pagan enemies. So, when the abominations of Antiochus IV occur, it will be a sign that the indignation of God against the covenant people for their idolatry during the Divided Kingdom period is coming to a fierce finality.
This “appointed time of the end” is the appointed time of the end of the O.T. dispensation, which would subsequently usher in the Messianic dispensation and the establishment of His kingdom on earth, the church. As is well known from history, when Antiochus IV died (about 165 B.C.), the Maccabean brothers continued their war of Jewish liberation, which was successful, and gave the Jews about 100 years of freedom and self-rule until about 63 B.C., when Pompey, one of the Roman Triumvirate, occupied Palestine as a part of the Roman empire. “In the fulness of time” God sent forth His Son, the Messiah, to establish His kingdom, the church. The Jews, for the most part, rejected the Messiah and crucified Him, but God raised Him from the dead, enthroned Him upon David’s throne, established His church (Acts 2), and in 70 A.D. permitted the Roman army to destroy the Jewish temple, slay a million Jews and sell another half-million into slavery all over the world. The O.T. dispensation was nailed to the cross at the death of Jesus (cf. Col 2:8-15). Even the O.T. predicted that its dispensation of God’s law would be supplanted with the new and real (cf. Heb 8:13; Jer 31:31-34). Please consult Minor Prophets, by Paul T. Butler, pub. College Press, for special studies on Christ now ruling on David’s throne.
The point is, God warned the Jews of the divided kingdoms in the earlier prophets (Amos, Hosea, Micah, Isaiah, Zephaniah, Jeremiah) that because of their idolatry (and consequent moral decadence) He was going to bring His “indignation” and “wrath” upon them in the form of captivity and oppression in order to chasten them, preparing them for the glorious blessings that would come to all who believed and accepted the promised Messiah and His kingdom. Now, God reveals through Daniel that this indignation and wrath is going to end some day—every appointed time of God has an end. The end of God’s chastening process will be indicated by this fierce, cunning, arrogant, blood-thirsty “little-horn” grown-great, appearing on the scene of history and bringing a terrible onslaught of the world power against God’s people. But he will not stand.
Dan 8:20-22 THE RAM WHICH THOU SAWEST . . . AND THE ROUGH HE-GOAT . . . There can be no doubt about this interpretation. God is revealing to Daniel the kingdoms of Persia and Greece (and that which shall grow out of Greece) centuries (about 400–500 years) before they appear on the scene of history. Actually, the entire span of history revealed to Daniel covers the period between Babylonian and Christ, some 600 years! For details on the two kingdoms mentioned here, see comments on Dan 8:1-8 and Dan 7:4-6.
Dan 8:23-25 . . . A KING OF FIERCE COUNTENANCE . . . This is Antiochus (IV) Epiphanes. For details on his reign see comments on Dan 8:9-17 and chapter 11. When the four kingdoms into which Alexander’s great empire was divided have about run their course, then this new king will put in his appearance. He is to be a master of deceit and dissimulation, able to conceal his meaning under ambiguous words. One translation has it, “understanding riddles” in place of “understanding dark sentences.” This king is not only a master of cunning, but he is also one that can not easily be deceived. The phrase, “. . . he shall be mighty, but not by his own power . . .” indicates plainly that only because God providentially allowed it did he become so great. And this is not foreign to God’s providence in the affairs of world rulers, as we have shown in the case of Nebuchadnezzar.
It will seem as if evil and deceit are about to take over the whole world when this king reigns. Whatever he undertakes will prosper (for a while). He will have power and cunning to do as he pleases, especially against his immediate political opponents and against the saints of God in Palestine.
Leupold says: “This is, in fact, a very skillfully condensed account of the checkered career of one of the most remarkable men that-strutted across the stage of history. Its very conciseness makes it ambiguous or difficult to understand if one skims over it too readily.” One personal characteristic that shall stand out as this man develops his career will be his proud, haughty, presumptuous nature. He will be so crafty in destroying any one who opposes him that while opponents think they are perfectly safe he is plotting their destruction, which he also executes craftily and speedily.
His inordinate pride and self-exaltation lead him to blaspheme and challenge the Almighty God (“prince of princes”) but God will not allow such evil and rebellion to thwart His Divine purposes. God without hands—by means . . . that appear to be providential or divine—will break this tyrant! His overthrow will come so as to indicate that man himself did not put this arrogant mortal out of the way, but He whose mills grind slowly but exceedingly fine did it. God only allowed this persecutor his day because God was willing that he be given opportunity to repent. When he did not repent, God used his persecutions to purge the people of God in preparation for the coming of the Messiah. The reign of Antiochus IV is chronicled in 1Ma 1:1 to 1Ma 6:16.
Dan 8:26-27 . . . SHUT THOU UP THE VISION . . . Since the prophecy was for a long time hence, Daniel was to preserve (“shut up”) the prophecy. To “shut up” the prophecy does not mean it is to be kept secret or that it is not yet to be understood. It means quite simply that it is to be permanently preserved by writing it down for posterity’s sake (cf. Rev 22:10). The psychological effect of the vision upon Daniel was exhausting. He was sick for a number of days before he could continue the king’s business. The contents of the vision and its interpretation remained for sometime in the immediate consciousness of Daniel and he pondered the vision over and over. But he remained perplexed because what had been told him would never be translated into action in his own lifetime, but was for many years to come.
QUIZ
1. Why did Daniel fall into a deep sleep?
2. When is the time of “indignation?” the time “of the end?”
3. Who is the great horn between the eyes of the he-goat?
4. Who is the king of “fierce countenance?”
5. Why describe him as one with “understanding dark sentences?”
6. Who gave him his power?
7. How did he cause “craft to prosper?”
8. How was he broken?
9. What does “shut up the vision” mean?
CHAPTER EIGHT
II. LOCKING HORNS--Dan 8:1-27
a. THE GOAT AND THE RAM
TEXT: Dan 8:1-8
1 In the third year of the reign of king Belshazzar a vision appeared unto me, even unto me, Daniel, after that which appeared unto me at the first.
2 And I saw in the vision; now it was so, that when I saw, I was in Shushan the palace, which is in the province of Elam; and I saw in the vision, and I was by the river Ulai.
3 Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last.
4 I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; and no beasts could stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will, and magnified himself.
5 And as I was considering, behold, a he-goat came from the west over the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.
6 And he came to the ram that had the two horns, which I saw standing before the river, and ran upon him in the fury of his power.
7 And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with anger against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns; and there was no power in the ram to stand before him; but he cast him down to the ground, and trampled upon him; and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.
8 And the he-goat magnified himself exceedingly; and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and instead of it there came up four notable horns toward the four winds of heaven.
QUERIES
a. Where is Shushan in the province of Elam?
b. What is the significance of the last horn of the ram coming up higher than its first horn?
c. Why was the he-goat moved with anger against the ram?
PARAPHRASE
In the third year of the reign of king Belshazzar, I, Daniel, had a second vision from the Lord, somewhat like the first. In this vision I found myself at Susa, the capital of the province of Elam, standing beside the Ulai River. As I was looking around, I saw a ram with two horns standing on the river bank; these two horns were large, but one was larger than the other and this larger of the two grew up last! The ram butted everything out of its way as it butted toward the west, the north and the south, and there was no one who could stand against it or render aid to its victims. This ram did as he pleased and became very great. And as I contemplated what all this might mean, lo, a he-goat came from the west, traversing his course of progress over all the earth so swiftly that he hardly even touched the ground. This he-goat had one very great horn between his eyes. He butted furiously at the two-horned ram, and the farther he came, the angrier he became toward the ram. He charged into the ram and broke off both his horns and when the ram was helpless the he-goat knocked it down and stamped it with his feet and none could deliver the ram from being destroyed by the he-goat. The he-goat then became proud and powerful, but suddenly, at the apex of his greatness, his horn was broken. In its place grew four strong horns pointing toward the four corners of the world.
COMMENT
Dan 8:1-2 . . . A VISION APPEARED TO ME . . . IN SHUSHAN . . . BY THE RIVER ULAI . . . Elam was a country situated on the east side of the Tigris river opposite Babylonia in a mountainous region. Its population was made up of a variety of tribes. Their language, different from the Sumerian, Semitic, and Indo-European tongues, was written in cuneiform script, It has not yet been deciphered to any great extent. Elam was one of the earliest civilizations. In Sumerian inscriptions it was called Numma (high mountain people), which term became Elamtu in Akkadian texts; in classical literature it was known as Susiana, the Greek name for Susa, the capital city of Elam. The river Ulai runs through the province of Elam, flowing on through the city of Susa, into the Tigris-Euphrates.
Why did Daniel deem it necessary to mention these places? Because Shushan was later to become the summer capital of the Persian Empire. When the vision appeared to Daniel, nothing concerning the future importance of this site was known. But since the fortunes of Persia were involved, the future center of Persian life and activity was the best background. The yet unknown Sushan no doubt needed to be located for many of Daniel’s readers—which certainly bears witness to the predictive nature of the Scriptures.
Archaeological effort in the last part of the 1880’s uncovered in Shushan the great palace of King Xerxes (486–465 B.C.) in which Queen Esther lived. Many Jews lived here in the captivities and became prominent in the affairs of the city as the books of Esther and Nehemiah show.
Dan 8:3-4 . . . BEHOLD, THERE STOOD BEFORE THE RIVER A RAM WHICH HAD TWO HORNS . . . ONE WAS HIGHER THAN THE OTHER . . . HE DID ACCORDING TO HIS WILL . . . MAGNIFIED HIMSELF . . . The ram is Medo-Persit (cf. Dan 8:20). The two horns are the two component parts of the empire, Media and Persia. The taller one came up last, which coincides with the history of this empire when Persia eventually became supreme and assimilated the Medes. How does the ram typify Persia? The ram is an emblem of princely power (cf. Eze 34:17; Eze 30:18; and Dan 8:20). The contrast between a ram and a he-goat is remarkably close to the relationship between Persia and Greece. The ram likes to butt things and yet there is something of a staid and sober character to it and not quite as flamboyant as the he-goat.
The history of Persia’s rapid conquest of the world is symbolized by the butting of the ram toward the west, north and south. It did not butt toward the east because she herself was the eastern most part of her empire. The “three” points of the compass agree with the “three” ribs in the mouth of the bear (chapter 7). The statement that “no beasts could stand before him” refers to the imagery of chapter 7 also and the command there, “Arise and devour much flesh.” There was little resistance to the Persian conquest of the world until Philip of Macedon (Alexander the Great’s father) of whom we have spoken earlier. The phrase “he did as he pleased” was in a special sense true of the Persian Empire. Whatever rulers and people wanted in the course of their conquests, that they did, no matter how irregular or strange it might seem to others.
That the Persian conquerors “magnified” themselves may be exemplified by this historical sketch from Archaeology and Our O.T. Contemporaries, by James Kelso, pub. by Zondervan; pgs. 167–172,
In Isaiah God speaks of Cyrus as His shepherd and His anointed i.e., Messiah. These two terms designate Cyrus as a king chosen by God to be His agent in world history. And Cyrus was, indeed, one of history’s most significant monarchs. Look at this abridged summary of the Persian empire which Cyrus created. For the first time in history the Persians give us a world empire dominated by Aryans. The previous Hamitic and Semitic world empires had made a tragedy of international government. But Persia brought in a veritable millennium for subject peoples. These Persians were virtually an unknown people until Cyrus in one generation made them masters of the world. Cyrus was at least as great a military genius as Alexander.
To create his empire Cyrus had to capture about twenty strong enemies including Lydia where Croesus, the richest man in the world, ruled Asia Minor; and Babylonia, the greatest of the ancient powers before Cyrus. He ruled from the Aegean Sea on the west to the Jaxartes River and the Himalayas on the east. All of these he consolidated into an empire that lasted two centuries. This is the final test of military power and it is here where Alexander was a total failure as his empire fell to pieces immediately upon his death.
Under Darius the Persian empire increased somewhat and was then twice the size of any previous world empire. Darius governed from the Balkans and Egypt on the west well into India on the east. The Persian empire ran for two centuries and gave the world the longest peace in history until the Pax Romana. About the middle of the Persian empire, Nehemiah, the last great political figure in the Old Testament, appeared. The Persian and the Roman empires were far more similar than formerly realized.
The Persian peace brought in one of the greatest periods of commercial expansion. They introduced an international language (Aramaic), rapid communications and good roads. They also put coinage on an international basis. In the sphere of politics Persia was the first world government to attempt to bring different races and nationalities under a central government which assured to all the rights and privileges of government as well as its burdens. They allowed the various subject races and existing civilizations to go on side by side with their own. They even permitted the Jews to coin their own money! Furthermore Persia interfered as little as possible in local government matters. Alexander himself found the Persian system of government so excellent that he took over almost bodily the Persian policy of world empire and simply grafted on to it his own Hellenistic policies.
The Persians’ respect for truth and honor and their humane and chivalrous character was the secret of their nation’s success. Their kings might lack these qualities, but the subject states of the empire seldom suffered seriously as most of the Persian subordinates were true to Persian ideals. The Persian’s diplomatic and commercial language was Aramaic, not Persian! Thus Aramaic became one of the world’s influential languages. Its inscriptions are found as far east as India. In Roman times the Levant had a renaissance of this language, which was then called Syriac, and it replaced Greek. The Persians were the founders of religious freedom on a world basis. Note that the Jews speak well only of the Persian empire. Rome returned to many of the Persian practices.
Many of the features of good government which these Persians introduced are those which we have often thought of as America’s unique contribution to world history. We should be doing far more than we are in the light of over two thousand years of international history and especially in 1900 years of the teachings of Jesus Christ. The Persians deserve far more credit in world history than they have received. Unfortunately, too often the Greeks have been their historians, and your bitter enemy seldom speaks well of you.
The Ram and the He-Goat
The Death of Alexander the Great
Now let us return to the days of Cyrus. In antiquity the nations who were successful in war brought home to their capital city the chief idols of the conquered peoples as the major prize of victory. Thus mighty Babylon held the world’s largest collection of gods in antiquity. When Cyrus conquered that empire he completely reversed this policy. He told all the conquered peoples to come to Babylon and take home their national gods. With Israel there was no idol, but the temple vessels taken away by Nebuchadnezzar were returned to Jerusalem in the care of Shesh-bazzar, fourth son of Jehoiachin. Under Darius, the Persian government even helped bear the expense of erecting Israel’s new temple.
Dan_8:5-8 . . . BEHOLD, A HE-GOAT . . . SMOTE THE RAM . . . THE GREAT HORN WAS BROKEN . . . THERE CAME UP FOUR NOTABLE HORNS . . . The buck-goat is a fitting symbol for the empire of Greece (cf. Dan 8:21) for it represents ruggedness and power (cf. Zec 10:3). It represents sure-footedness and quickness. In 1Ma 1:3 Alexander’s conquests are thus described: “He went through to the ends of the earth and took spoils of a multitude of nations; and the earth was quite before him,” His conquests were so rapid the he-goat is represented as “not touching the ground,” or literally, skimming over the earth. He came from ma-arabh (where the sun sets—the west). This he-goat had a “horn of conspicuousness’” (a prominent horn) between its eyes. This prominent horn represents Alexander the Great.
The “river” is significant for it symbolizes the historic clash of the Greeks and the Persians at the Granicus river where they met in their first Asiatic war. The “great anger” points to the cry for vengeance from the Greek city states after years of assaults across the Aegean sea by the Persian hordes in 490–480 B.C. and battle at Marathon, Salamis, Plataea and Athens. When Darius landed near the plain of Marathon in 490 B.C. the city of Athens dispatched a runner, Pheidippides, to Sparta to summon long-pledged aid. He covered 140 miles in two days, but he raced in vain. For the famed fighters of Sparta, celebrating a festival of Apollo, could not go to war during that holy time. Athens hastily mobilized militia, and her general Miltiades gave the order: “Take food and march.” Miltiades, by shrewdly outwitting and outflanking his foe (the Persian army) and by courageously charging into the ranks of the Persians (Merodotus wrote, “They were the first Greeks . . . who charged their enemies at a run . . .”) defeated Darius at Marathon. Most Greeks hailed Marathon as glorious proof of their invincibility. But Themistocles, an Athenian statesman, warned that the Persians would return. Like Churchill in Britain between world wars, Themistocles went unheeded by the masses and was mocked by political opponents. The rich fought his plan for a tax-financed navy, preferring the self-supported citizen army. Across the Aegean, meanwhile, the Persian empire was conscripting men, ships, and arms for a land-and-sea invasion of Greece. In 481, Xerxes, successor to his father’s throne, massed three forces on the Asian shore of the Hellespont. Athens Sparta, Corinth, and Aegina responded by forming a defensive league that would eventually include 31 city-states. But most Greeks, awed by Persian might, favored neutrality or even alliance with the invaders.
Xerxes bridged the channel with boats. His Egyptian subjects, renowned as the world’s best ropemakers, produced the great bridge cables (a sample of their craft has been excavated in an Egyptian quarry: rope 18 inches in diameter attached to a 70-ton block of stone). Sod covered the mile-long plank roadway and high screens lined it so that animals crossing on it would not shy at the seething current. Across the Hellespont in 480 tramped an army that ancients numbered in the millions. Some 1000 ships paralleled the army’s march, landing men and supplies as the invaders headed westward through Thrace, Macedonia, and Thessaly. The fleet traversed a canal Xerxes had ordered cut through the Mount Athos peninsula. He must have paid for the work in gold darics (named for Darius). A 300-coin cache has been found there. The Persians lived off the land. But unlike the Greeks, they were great meat eaters, so their fleet maintained food dumps holding beasts for slaughter and stores of salt meat of every kind. The depots also had piles of papyri for paper-work—a military feature alien to Greeks.
This massive army consisted of Persian warriors in leather jerkins and fish-scale armor, high-booted Phrygians; Mysians bearing sharpened stakes, wooden-helmeted men of the Caucasus, Scythians in pointed caps, Iranians behind tall wicker shields, an Arabian camel corps, ass-drawn chariots from India—and Ethopians in lionskins who brandished stone-headed clubs and spears tipped with gazelle horn. The exotic horde marched on toward Athens, drinking rivers dry, ravaging the land. But this slave army, said Herodotus, marched under the lash. And ahead lay a pass called Thermopylae, defended by a band of freemen.
Xerxes, enthroned near the pass to watch his men pour through, laughed at a scout’s report of vain Greek warriors bathing and preening on the eve of battle. But a Greek, serving Xerxes, heard the report and understood: the troops were Spartans, ritualistically preparing to die. “O king!” he exclaimed, “now you are face to face with the most valiant men in Hellas.” Aeschylus, veteran of the battle in the Salamis Strait, re-created it in his play The Persians. He told how the Greeks’ bronze-sheathed rams smashed into the Persians “till hulls rolled over, and the sea itself was hidden, strewn with their wreckage, dyed with blood of men. The dead lay thick on all the reefs and beaches, and flight broke out . . .”
Bearing news of the Salamis disaster, messengers sped across the Aegean, rode the Royal Road from Sardis to Susa, and galloped along the highways that linked the satrapies of the Persian empire. “Neither snow, nor rain, nor heat, nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds,” wrote Herodotus, which centuries later became the official motto of the U.S. Post Office. The following summer the Persian messengers had more bad news to spread: An army of some 100,000 Greeks had wiped out the last of the invaders in a battle at Plataea in the hills of Thebes.
And the rest belongs to the history of Alexander the Great, the he-goat whose armies went about their task of conquest as though it were being done to avenge a great wrong: His anger grew to the point where it was nothing less than rage—Alexander was bent upon obliterating every vestige of Persian control in the earth.
Alexander and his men spent the winter of 331 B.C. luxuriating in the splendor of Persepolis. One evening, encouraged by his drunken colleagues, Alexander burned the palaces of Xerxes in revenge against that king, who had put Athens to the torch 150 years before. “Avenge Greece,” cried Alexander, hurling the first firebrand. “As soon as sleep had restored his senses,” wrote Curtius, “Alexander regretted what he had done.”
Half the peoples were already subjugated. But to win all Persia, Alexander would have to conquer the rest. His greatest efforts were still to come. In the spring of 330 B.C. Alexander marched north to Ecbatana, Persia’s summer capital, now Hamadan. His object: the capture of Darius himself. But the Persian fled through the Caspian Gates, a pass over the Elburz Mountains. The Macedonian pursued him, averaging an extraordinary 36 miles a day. When he caught the straggling baggage train, he found Darius dead, murdered by his own disillusioned generals. King of Persia at last, Alexander marched to Zadracarta, modern Gorgan, to assume not only the title but the pomp of an oriental monarch.
At the Beas River, just inside present India, Alexander faced a real mutiny for the first time. His homesick men, unnerved by the fierce fight against Porus, concerned by reports of even greater armies ahead, refused to go on. Alexander summoned his officers and tried to rally them. Silence greeted him. Then Coenus, a faithful general, rose, removed his helmet, and addressed Alexander: “O king, I speak not for those officers present, but for the men . . . Those that survive yearn to return to their families, to enjoy while they yet live the riches you have won for them . . . A noble thing, O king, is to know when to stop.” Angered and disappointed by the speech, Alexander sulked in his tent for three days. When as last he bowed to the will of his men, they rejoiced. “Alexander,” they said, “has allowed us, but no other, to defeat him.” He led his men back to the Jhelum to begin the journey home.
As Arrian wrote, “Alexander had no small or mean conceptions, nor would ever have remained contented with any of his possessions . . . but would always have searched far beyond . . . being always the rival, if of no other, yet of himself.” As he turned from further conquests in India it is reported that he “wept because there were no more worlds to conquer.” He died in Persepolis at the age of 32.
Idolized by his men, hailed as divine in lands he won, Alexander passed into the legends of three continents. Central Asia worshipped him as Iskander, founder of cities (one, Bucephala, honored his horse). Chiefs in Turkistan claim descent from him; Afghan mothers frighten naughty children with tales of Iskander. Persians called him son of Darius; Egyptians, son of the last Pharaoh, Nectanebo. Ethiopia made him a saint, and Islam enrolled him as a prophet. Mogul art shows him in a diving bell seeking the sea’s secrets. Medieval Europe depicted him as a knight of chivalry. Romans, first to call Alexander “the Great,” held themselves heirs to his empire and ambitions. Augustus wore Alexander’s head on a signet ring, emulated his deeds and divinity. Even Buddha owes his image to Alexander’s march into the Orient. Inspired by statues Greeks brought to Bandhara, sculptors created Buddha in the image of Apollo, but added to his forehead the Oriental third eye, which emits spiritual light.
He won an empire covering more than one and one half million square miles. He had mapped unknown territory, built cities, opened trade routes, stimulated the exchange of ideas. From the Mediterranean to the Hindu Kush, Greek became the lingua franca of court and commerce.
His vast realm survived for only a few years as the Diadochi—his “successors”—fought each other for power. Dan_8:8 and its “four notable horns” coming up in the place of the great horn (Alexander) are parallel to the four heads of the “leopard” of chapter 7 and represent the four-way division of Alexander’s empire between Ptolemy, Antigonus, Cassander and Lysimachus (see our comments on Dan 7:4-6).
QUIZ
1. Why did Daniel mention all the geographical locations in Dan 8:2?
2. Whom does the ram symbolize and how extensive was his empire?
3. What is the significance of the ram “doing as he pleased?”
4. Who is represented by the “he-goat?”
5. Why is the “he-goat” represented as moving with anger against the ram?
6. How extensive was the empire of the “he-goat?”
7. What is represented by the “four notable horns?”
Daniel 8:9-17
b. THE GREAT HORN AND THE RIGHTEOUS PRINCE
TEXT: Dan 8:9-17
9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the glorious land.
10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and some of the host and of the stars it cast down to the ground, and trampled upon them.
11 Yea, it magnified itself, even to the prince of the host; and it took away from him the continual burnt-offering, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.
12 And the host was given over to it together with the continual burnt-offering through transgression; and it cast down truth to the ground, and it did its pleasure and prospered.
13 Then I heard a holy one speaking; and another holy one said unto that certain one who spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the continual burnt-offering, and the transgression that maketh desolate, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?
14 And he said unto me, unto two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
15 And it came to pass, when I, even I Daniel, had seen the vision, that I sought to understand it; and, behold, there stood before me as the appearance of a man.
16 And I heard a man’s voice between the banks of the Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.
17 So he came near where I stood; and when he came, I was affrighted, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man; for the vision belongeth to the time of the end.
QUERIES
a. Why does the “little horn” come forth from the four?
b. Who is the “host” and the “prince of the host?”
c. What is the “time of the end?”
PARAPHRASE
And from one of the four notable horns, came one little horn growing slowly at first, soon becoming very strong, and it extended itself toward the south and the east and toward the glorious, holy land of God’s people, Canaan. This arrogant horn extended its evil power against the hosts of God’s people and some of them were slain, that is, many of God’s heavenly saints were killed. Yes, this presumptuous and boastful horn even exalted itself over God himself taking it upon himself to prohibit the daily sacrifices in the temple of the Jews which God had commanded to be offered, and the horn desecrated the temple until it was defiled beyond use. And God allowed some of the Jews and His temple to come under the power of this horn because of the apostasy of some who agreed to the defilement of the temple by the horn. This despicable horn carried on such an immoral paganization of the holy land that justice, truth, and righteousness seemed to vanish and evil seemed to be triumphing. Just then I heard two angels talking one another. One said to the other, How long will it be until the daily sacrifices are restored again? How long until the desecration of the temple is avenged and God’s people triumph? The other replied, a time just short of seven years, that is 2300 days, will transpire and then the temple of God will be purified of pagan defilement. And as I was trying to understand the meaning of this vision, suddenly a being in the appearance of a man stood before me and I heard a man’s voice from across the river Ulai. The voice said, Gabriel, make this prophet understand the vision he has just received. So Gabriel started toward me. But as he came near I was too frightened to stand up and I fell down with my face to the ground. He said, son of man, you must understand that the events you have seen in your vision will not take place until near the end of the old covenant dispensation.
The Little Horn Developed
COMMENT
Dan 8:9-10 . . . CAME FORTH A LITTLE HORN . . . WAXED GREAT, EVEN TO THE HOST OF HEAVEN . . . The description given here and in subsequent verses of this chapter is so definite and specific that the “little horn” here can be no other than Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) and his immediate predecessors (The Seleucids). Ptolemy I, one of the four who succeeded Alexander to his empire, appointed Seleucus Nicator (312–280 B.C.) to administer Syria for him. There followed almost a century and a half of war between the Ptolomies and the Seleucids for sovereignty in Syria and Palestine. This is discussed at length in chapter eleven of this work. In this text all the Seleucid rulers between Seleucus Nicator and Antiochus the IV are passed over with the phrase, “came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south . . . and east . . . and the glorious land.” Dan_8:10 brings the reader abruptly to Antiochus Epiphanes (about 175–165 B.C.).
It is important to note that the “little horn” here grows out of one of the four which definitely belong to the Grecian Empire. It cannot, therefore, be the same little horn of chapter 7 which overthrew three of the ten which were definitely connected to the fourth beast. The Scofield Reference Bible declares this passage (Dan 8:10-14) to be the “most difficult in prophecy.” While it refers the passage to Antiochus IV, still it connects the horn of chapter 8 to the horn of chapter 7 inferring they are one and the same. Such seems clearly contradictory in view of the fact that the Scofield Reference Bible declares the fourth beast of chapter 7 to be the Roman Empire.
The “glorious land” can be none other than the Holy Land, Palestine. This horn “waxed great” or extended its power south and east from Syria, even into Palestine, to the very borders of Egypt. The “host of heaven” and the “stars” are simply God’s covenant people (and not any special group of Jewish priests or rulers). One may find a number of references or figurative parallels where God’s saints of the O.T. are likened unto the stars of heaven (Jer 33:22; Dan 12:3, etc.); they are also referred to as the “hosts” (cf. Exo 7:4; Exo 12:41).
The terrible, presumptuous deeds of Antiochus IV against the saints of God were in reality arrogant wickednesses against Heaven itself.
Dan 8:11-12 . . . IT MAGNIFIED ITSELF, EVEN TO THE PRINCE OF THE HOST . . . AND THE HOST WAS GIVEN OVER TO IT . . . This little horn (Antiochus Epiphanes) arrogated to himself the prerogatives of Almighty God. He actually considered himself equal to God and commanded that likenesses of himself be placed in the temple of the Jews and worshipped as god. That this Syrian ruler actually forbade the Jews to offer their regular sacrifices is confirmed by 1Ma 1:44-47 : “And the king sent letters by the hand of messengers unto Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, that they should follow laws strange to the land, and should forbid whole burnt offerings and sacrifice and drink offerings in the sanctuary; and should profane the sabbaths and feasts, and pollute the sanctuary and them that were holy.” Antiochus did not actually tear down the temple, but he desecrated it to such a point, even commanding that a swine be slain on the temple altar, that it was not fit for use. He also substituted an altar to Jupiter for the altar of burnt offering. This was the crowning abomination.
Great numbers of the people of Israel consorted with Antiochus and welcomed his Hellenization of their culture. Many of them were given over to transgression. God permitted it—He did not cause it! The same principle is evident here as is announced in 2Th 2:11-12. If men wish to be deluded it is in the economy of God’s creating them as free, moral agents, that they shall be permitted to be so deluded. If, however, they wish to know the truth and love the truth, God will always make it possible that they shall have the opportunity to know it and practice it.
This pagan ruler “cast down truth to the ground,” and all descriptions of evil flourished and prospered for a time. Every copy of Jewish scriptures that could be found was burned and many faithful Jews were slain. One need only read I Maccabees to know of the terrible paganization and attendant persecution of this time. (For more detailed information concerning the reign of Antiochus IV see our comments on Dan 11:20 ff)
Dan 8:13-14 . . . HOW LONG . . . THE TRANSGRESSION THAT MAKETH DESOLATE . . . UNTO TWO THOUSAND AND THREE HUNDRED EVENINGS AND MORNINGS . . . God sent His angels into the presence of Daniel to discuss the matter under consideration so that Daniel might through their words arrive at an authoritative interpretation. These are things angels desire to look into (cf. 1Pe 1:10-12). One angel seems to be more knowledgeable than the other concerning the times and seasons of God’s counsels, (see our Special Study on Angels at the end of chapter 10).
There are two principal interpretations of Dan 8:14: (a) it means 1150 days; those who adopt this view insist that the prophecy is related to the daily morning and evening sacrifices and 2300 such sacrifices would therefore be offered on 1150 days. They also connect this to the horn of chapter 7, especially with Dan 7:25, which they contend is 3½ years (a time, times and half a time) and 1150 days is nearly equivalent to 3½ years. It should be obvious, however, that 1150 days do not equal 3½ years, even when these years are regarded as comprising only. 360 days each or a total of 1260 days. It should also be obvious that the “horn” of chapter 7 and the “horn” of chapter 8 are different “horns.” (b) it means 2300 days and is probably a derivative of Genesis 1, where an “evening and a morning” are reckoned as a full day. In the O.T. an expression such, as 40 days and 40 nights does not mean 20 days, nor does 3 days and 3 nights mean either 6 days or 1½ days; it means 3 days. Keil says: “A Hebrew reader could not possibly understand the period of time 2300 evening-mornings of 2300 half days or 1150 whole days, because evening and morning at the creation constituted not the half but the whole day.” So we must understand the phrase as meaning 2300 whole days.
But how are the 2300 days to be applied to the history of Antiochus? The number 2300 shows that the period must be defined in round numbers (the number 10 and any multiple of it is an incomplete number or a “round” number and should not be taken literally), measuring only nearly the actual time. This conforms to all genuine prophecy because genuine prophecy never makes mantic prediction of exact days and hours its primary focus. The period (2300 days) are undoubtedly referring to the period of Antiochus’ abominable treatment of the Jews. This began in the year 171 B.C., one year before his return from his second expedition to Egypt. In this year began the laying waste of the sanctuary. The termination would then be the death of Antiochus (164 B.C.). The 2300 days cover a period of six years and about 4 months. Keil believes that the number (being a little short of 7 years) possesses a symbolic meaning, namely, not quite the full duration of a period of divine judgment. It does seem to be used to cover approximately the period of the persecution under Antiochus. Leupold says: “The fact that it is expressed in days reminds the troubled Israelites that the Lord will not let this period extend a day beyond what they can bear.” Thus when these days (the period that is not even a full period of divine judgment) shall have come to an end, “then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” This makes it very plain that what is really marked by the 2300 days is the period of the desecration of the sanctuary.
Dan 8:15-17 . . . I SOUGHT TO UNDERSTAND . . . GABRIEL, MAKE THIS MAN TO UNDERSTAND . . . THE VISION BELONGETH TO THE TIME OF THE END . . . Daniel knows only, so far, that the overthrow of the sanctuary and the sufferings of the saints were not to last even through an entire divine judgment period. But he seeks to understand more. And at the mere desire (not even an audible prayer was made by Daniel) lo, an angel of God stands before him. Here and in Dan 9:21 Gabriel is named; in Dan 10:13 ff. Michael is named. The only O.T. book in which angels receive names is Daniel, and Gabriel and Michael are the only two who are named. This is so in the N.T., Luk 1:19; Luk 1:26; Jud 1:9.
The presence of perfect holiness before Daniel causes him, sinful man, to tremble with fear and he falls upon his face as if to hide. The vision is definitely to be understood because it has to do with the time of the end! This should indicate immediately that it is not speaking of the end of all time, the Second Advent of Christ, for the N.T. plainly states that “no one knoweth the day nor the hour . . .” and, “in a time that ye think not; the Son of man cometh . . .” Furthermore, there is a specific key to contextual interpretation of this “time of the end” and that is Dan 8:19, “the latter part of the indignation.” It can only refer to the end of time when afflictions or indignation are to be permitted upon Israel. IT IS THE END OF THE O.T. PERIOD AND THE USHERING IN OF THE NEW! This “time of the end” reaches only to the end of those special afflictions that are to come on the people of the Jews before the Messianic period, and which are made the subject of prophecy because of their importance to the preparation of the covenant people for the coming of the Messiah and the establishment of His kingdom which is gloriously symbolized in the prophets as the time of God’s victory over His enemies and the restoring of the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem. The view that the “time of the end” here has reference to the great tribulation, supposedly to occur during the latter half of the 70th week is utterly without exegetical support from this context or any combination of texts!
QUIZ
1. Why is that “little horn” different from the “little horn” of chapter 7?
2. What is the “glorious land?”
3. How did the horn “wax great” against the stars and the prince?
4. How did it take away the continual burnt-offering?
5. What is the meaning of, “the host was given over to it?”
6. What period of time is indicated by 2300 evenings and mornings?
7. Why is the “time of the end” not the end of time?
Daniel 8:18-27
c. GRIEVOUS TIMES AND RETRIBUTION
TEXT: Dan 8:18-27
18 Now as he was speaking with me, I fell into a deep sleep with my face toward the ground; but he touched me, and set me upright.
19 And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the latter time of the indignation; for it belongeth to the appointed time of the end.
20 The ram which thou sawest, that had the two horns, they are the kings of Media and Persia.
21 And the rough he-goat is the king of Greece: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
22 And as for that which was broken, in the place whereof four stood up, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not with his power.
23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.
24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power; and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper and do his pleasure; and he shall destroy the mighty ones and the holy people.
25 And through his policy he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and in their security shall he destroy many; he shall also stand up against the prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.
26 And the vision of the evenings and mornings which hath been told is true: but shut thou up the vision; for it belongeth to many days to come.
27 And I, Daniel, fainted, and was sick certain days; then I rose up, and did the king’s business: and I wondered at the vision, but none understood it.
QUERIES
a. How shall the “king of fierce countenance” have mighty power, but not by his own power? Dan 8:24
b. How is he to be “broken without hand?” Dan 8:25
c. Why was Daniel told to “shut up the vision?” Dan 8:26
PARAPHRASE
The more the angel spoke to me the more I became upset with my moral sinfulness, until I actually fainted. But the angel simply touched me and I awoke from my faint and had strength to stand up again. Then the angel said to me, Lo, I am revealing to you the things that shall happen in the final period of the Babylonian captivity (the period of God’s anger against His covenant-breaking people). Every appointed time of God has an end—and so His anger will end too! The ram which you saw in this vision having two horns represents the two-headed kingdom of Medo-Persia. The shaggy he-goat represents the empire of Greece and the tall horn which grows between its eyes represents its most illustrious emperor, Alexander the Great. When you saw this great horn break off, and four smaller horns replacing it, this indicates that the Grecian empire will break into four sections at the death of this great king with four separate kings, none of them as great as the first king. Toward the end of these four kingdoms, when the apostate Jews, who love the transgressions of paganism, have grown exceedingly wicker, a fierce, wicked and adamant king, who shall also be a master of deceit and cunning, shall arise from this background to rule over the covenant people. His power shall be tremendous, but that, is only because God, in His providence, is permitting him to have such power for a season. Prospering wherever he turns, his power to destroy powerful opponents and the saints of God will seem remarkable. And by his cunning he shall be successful in catching many of his opponents off guard as they bask in false security. He will destroy them with craftiness; so great will he think himself to be that he will even defy the Almighty God; when his end comes, it will be apparent that he was brought down by Almighty God, and not by mortal men. Now this remarkable and unique vision is true—do not doubt that Daniel. Preserve this revelation safely for, although it has to do with the end times of the Mosaic dispensation, these things are still in the distant future. So overcome was I, that for some days I was sick before I could continue the king’s business. And though the contents of the vision and its interpretation remained firmly fixed in my mind, it greatly perplexed me and others to whom I related it.
COMMENT
Dan 8:18-19 . . . I FELL INTO A DEEP SLEEP . . . BUT . . . HE SET ME UPRIGHT . . . KNOW . . . THE LATTER TIME OF THE INDIGNATION . . . Daniel’s awareness of the great gulf between the sinfulness of mortals and the perfect holiness of angelic beings was so overcoming that he apparently fainted into unconsciousness. But the supernatural ministration of the angelic being was sufficient to restore Daniel to wakefulness, and strength to stand up and receive the revelation from God the messenger had to relate.
This message had to do with the closing days of the “indignation.” Now that term “indignation” (or “wrath”) can only refer to the captivities of the covenant people of the O.T. (Israel’s ‘captivity by Assyria, and Judah’s captivity by Babylon and her successors, Persia, Greece). For scriptural confirmation of this see Isa 10:5;
Isa 10:25; Isa 26:20, etc. The term “indignation” is a technical term used by the prophets to designate the wrath of God and His displeasure executed in giving the covenant people over to captivity, or to oppression by their pagan enemies. So, when the abominations of Antiochus IV occur, it will be a sign that the indignation of God against the covenant people for their idolatry during the Divided Kingdom period is coming to a fierce finality.
This “appointed time of the end” is the appointed time of the end of the O.T. dispensation, which would subsequently usher in the Messianic dispensation and the establishment of His kingdom on earth, the church. As is well known from history, when Antiochus IV died (about 165 B.C.), the Maccabean brothers continued their war of Jewish liberation, which was successful, and gave the Jews about 100 years of freedom and self-rule until about 63 B.C., when Pompey, one of the Roman Triumvirate, occupied Palestine as a part of the Roman empire. “In the fulness of time” God sent forth His Son, the Messiah, to establish His kingdom, the church. The Jews, for the most part, rejected the Messiah and crucified Him, but God raised Him from the dead, enthroned Him upon David’s throne, established His church (Acts 2), and in 70 A.D. permitted the Roman army to destroy the Jewish temple, slay a million Jews and sell another half-million into slavery all over the world. The O.T. dispensation was nailed to the cross at the death of Jesus (cf. Col 2:8-15). Even the O.T. predicted that its dispensation of God’s law would be supplanted with the new and real (cf. Heb 8:13; Jer 31:31-34). Please consult Minor Prophets, by Paul T. Butler, pub. College Press, for special studies on Christ now ruling on David’s throne.
The point is, God warned the Jews of the divided kingdoms in the earlier prophets (Amos, Hosea, Micah, Isaiah, Zephaniah, Jeremiah) that because of their idolatry (and consequent moral decadence) He was going to bring His “indignation” and “wrath” upon them in the form of captivity and oppression in order to chasten them, preparing them for the glorious blessings that would come to all who believed and accepted the promised Messiah and His kingdom. Now, God reveals through Daniel that this indignation and wrath is going to end some day—every appointed time of God has an end. The end of God’s chastening process will be indicated by this fierce, cunning, arrogant, blood-thirsty “little-horn” grown-great, appearing on the scene of history and bringing a terrible onslaught of the world power against God’s people. But he will not stand.
Dan 8:20-22 THE RAM WHICH THOU SAWEST . . . AND THE ROUGH HE-GOAT . . . There can be no doubt about this interpretation. God is revealing to Daniel the kingdoms of Persia and Greece (and that which shall grow out of Greece) centuries (about 400–500 years) before they appear on the scene of history. Actually, the entire span of history revealed to Daniel covers the period between Babylonian and Christ, some 600 years! For details on the two kingdoms mentioned here, see comments on Dan 8:1-8 and Dan 7:4-6.
Dan 8:23-25 . . . A KING OF FIERCE COUNTENANCE . . . This is Antiochus (IV) Epiphanes. For details on his reign see comments on Dan 8:9-17 and chapter 11. When the four kingdoms into which Alexander’s great empire was divided have about run their course, then this new king will put in his appearance. He is to be a master of deceit and dissimulation, able to conceal his meaning under ambiguous words. One translation has it, “understanding riddles” in place of “understanding dark sentences.” This king is not only a master of cunning, but he is also one that can not easily be deceived. The phrase, “. . . he shall be mighty, but not by his own power . . .” indicates plainly that only because God providentially allowed it did he become so great. And this is not foreign to God’s providence in the affairs of world rulers, as we have shown in the case of Nebuchadnezzar.
It will seem as if evil and deceit are about to take over the whole world when this king reigns. Whatever he undertakes will prosper (for a while). He will have power and cunning to do as he pleases, especially against his immediate political opponents and against the saints of God in Palestine.
Leupold says: “This is, in fact, a very skillfully condensed account of the checkered career of one of the most remarkable men that-strutted across the stage of history. Its very conciseness makes it ambiguous or difficult to understand if one skims over it too readily.” One personal characteristic that shall stand out as this man develops his career will be his proud, haughty, presumptuous nature. He will be so crafty in destroying any one who opposes him that while opponents think they are perfectly safe he is plotting their destruction, which he also executes craftily and speedily.
His inordinate pride and self-exaltation lead him to blaspheme and challenge the Almighty God (“prince of princes”) but God will not allow such evil and rebellion to thwart His Divine purposes. God without hands—by means . . . that appear to be providential or divine—will break this tyrant! His overthrow will come so as to indicate that man himself did not put this arrogant mortal out of the way, but He whose mills grind slowly but exceedingly fine did it. God only allowed this persecutor his day because God was willing that he be given opportunity to repent. When he did not repent, God used his persecutions to purge the people of God in preparation for the coming of the Messiah. The reign of Antiochus IV is chronicled in 1Ma 1:1 to 1Ma 6:16.
Dan 8:26-27 . . . SHUT THOU UP THE VISION . . . Since the prophecy was for a long time hence, Daniel was to preserve (“shut up”) the prophecy. To “shut up” the prophecy does not mean it is to be kept secret or that it is not yet to be understood. It means quite simply that it is to be permanently preserved by writing it down for posterity’s sake (cf. Rev 22:10). The psychological effect of the vision upon Daniel was exhausting. He was sick for a number of days before he could continue the king’s business. The contents of the vision and its interpretation remained for sometime in the immediate consciousness of Daniel and he pondered the vision over and over. But he remained perplexed because what had been told him would never be translated into action in his own lifetime, but was for many years to come.
QUIZ
1. Why did Daniel fall into a deep sleep?
2. When is the time of “indignation?” the time “of the end?”
3. Who is the great horn between the eyes of the he-goat?
4. Who is the king of “fierce countenance?”
5. Why describe him as one with “understanding dark sentences?”
6. Who gave him his power?
7. How did he cause “craft to prosper?”
8. How was he broken?
9. What does “shut up the vision” mean?
