Daniel 11-Part 1

Deciphering DanielPart 1  •  Sermon  •  Submitted   •  Presented   •  33:15
0 ratings
· 181 views
Files
Notes
Transcript
Handout
Handout
Sermon Tone Analysis
A
D
F
J
S
Emotion
A
C
T
Language
O
C
E
A
E
Social
View more →

11:1–45 This section outlines the succession of kings during the transition period from Persian dominance to Greek dominance—represented by the third and fourth beasts of Dan 7, and the ram and goat in ch. 8. The struggle for control of Palestine between the rival Hellenistic Greek kingdoms of the Ptolemies and Seleucids also receives attention. The career of the little horn of chs. 7–8 also receives greater detail. All of these events were experienced by the Jewish people after Daniel’s lifetime.

11:1–45 This section outlines the succession of kings during the transition period from Persian dominance to Greek dominance—represented by the third and fourth beasts of Dan 7, and the ram and goat in ch. 8. The struggle for control of Palestine between the rival Hellenistic Greek kingdoms of the Ptolemies and Seleucids also receives attention. The career of the little horn of chs. 7–8 also receives greater detail. All of these events were experienced by the Jewish people after Daniel’s lifetime.

Ptolomies-The Helenistic Rulers of Egypt. Seleucids- The Hellenistic rulers of Syria and Iraq following the death of Alexander the Great.
The Hellenistic rulers of Syria and Iraq following the death of Alexander the Great.
Barry, J. D., Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Ritzema, E., … Bomar, D. (2012, 2016). Faithlife Study Bible. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

3 Kings

The identities of the three kings (in addition to Cyrus; see 10:1) are uncertain. They may be Darius, Xerxes (also known as Ahasuerus), and Artaxerxes.

Daniel 10:1 may indicate that the visions of chs. 10–12 take place during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia. The only other Persian kings mentioned specifically in the Hebrew Bible are Darius, Xerxes (also known as Ahasuerus), and Artaxerxes (see Ezra 4:5–7)—the most likely candidates to be referred to here. The four together may be represented by the four wings and four heads on the leopard-like beast of Dan 7:6. ch. 11 closely tracks events associated with ancient Persia and Greece until late in the chapter, when correlations become less transparent. This has led many to suspect that the remainder of the chapter should be interpreted eschatologically.

the fourth

Likely Darius III Codomannus (336–330 BC). This king could alternatively be Xerxes I, but the connection with the fall of Persia to Alexander in the next verse makes Darius III more likely.

Darius III Codomannus, the last Persian king, was defeated by Alexander. Since Alexander’s campaign is mentioned in v. 3, the fourth king here is likely Darius III, with whom the Persian kingdom collapsed. He is called “a fourth” in addition to the three in the beginning of v. 2, although those three complete a group of four kings (see previous note). The sequence of Persian kings in Daniel is Cyrus, Darius, Xerxes (also known as Ahasuerus), Artaxerxes, and Darius III. There were other kings of Persia, but these are the five with which Daniel is concerned.

a mighty king

The Hebrew phrase here can be translated as “warrior king,” which describes well the career of Alexander.

Alexander the Great (356–323 BC)

Alexander the Great (356–323 BC) was one of the greatest military conquerors of all time. In less than 13 years, he gained control of all of Greece in the west and extended his rule into the Tigris and Euphrates Valley in the east (Arrian, Anab. 7.28.1; Diodorus, Bibliotheca historica 17. 8.1–2; 17.65.5; Plutarch, Alex. 11–12). Having conquered Persia, he pressed the attack further to the borders of India (Strabo Geogr. 14.4.27; 1 Maccabees 1:1–7; Diodorus, Lib. Hist.17.85.6–7). His advance into the subcontinent was not halted by opposing forces, but by his own war-weary generals, who refused to heed their ambitious leader and declined to cross the Ganges River (Plutarch, Alex. 71.1–5; Arrian, Anab. 7.8.1–3). Nevertheless, in a short period of time, Alexander had redrawn the map of the ancient world—all before he was 30. Perhaps more importantly, Alexander crafted a strategy for conquest and control that would serve as the blueprint for world rulers in the ages to come—especially for the Romans.

Yet Alexander’s meteoric rise to power was not a result of his genius alone. He built his empire upon the shoulders of his father, Philip II of Macedon. Philip’s militant drive to subdue surrounding nations, regardless of distance, paved the way for his son to conquer the world. Yet even Philip’s larger-than-life legacy was not enough for Alexander. He believed that the blood of the gods coursed through his veins. In his view, Hercules was the progenitor of his father’s side of the family, and his mother, Olympias, was a descendent of Achilles (Plutarch, Alex. 2.1). Alexander took this to mean that he was destined for world domination.

Kingdom is divided among 4 generals.

Egypt & Syria

References to the kings of the north & kings of the south. Two dynastic succors of ATG.

Ptolemies & Seleucids

Descendants of ATG general; Ptolemy. Ptolomies-The Helenistic Rulers of Egypt. KINGS OF THE SOUTH
Seleucids- ATG general Selucis. The Hellenistic rulers of Syria and Iraq following the death of Alexander the Great. KINGS OF THE NORTH
Seleucids- The Hellenistic rulers of Syria and Iraq following the death of Alexander the Great.
Barry, J. D., Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Ritzema, E., … Bomar, D. (2012, 2016). Faithlife Study Bible. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

Israel lies between these two kingdoms.

The Israelites will recover but they will live in terrible times . Having a working knowledge of this time frame is very important. Having a resource about the Second temple or the intertestamental can be very helpful to guide your interpretation. We do not have time to go step by step. But the history in this time frame is very complicated and complex. It is unlikely that anything that we, as modern readers, have any familiarity with what is going as we read Daniel. But this is due primarily to our lack of knowledge of the history of this time. As a result it appears very foreign to us.
One of the significant factors of these two houses is the intermarriage that takes place. Both dynasties are severely disrupted by the drama that takes place as a result of the intermarriage of these two dynasties.

This history recorded both in history and , should remind us of . And Nebuchadnezzars dream of the statue.

As you saw the iron mixed with soft clay, so they will mix with one another in marriage, but they will not hold together, just as iron does not mix with clay

This appears to be a great description of what characterizes what happens between the Ptolemies and the Selucids. So, if you are tracking with how this affects ones view of the statue and the 4 beats. You may see that this give greater credence to the idea that Greece and not Rome is the 4th Kingdom.
We now move to a section of the vision that narrows the focus of history. Up until know in the vision we have been sweeping through a long period of history. Now we will slow down to focus in just one king. The worst of the all. Daniel slows down in its scope. Which should later us to it’s significance.
Scholars agree that vs21-35 are about... (although there is some disagreement when we get to verse 36)

Antiochus IV Epiphanes

A Seleucid ruler who outlawed Judaism in an attempt to Hellenize Judaea. Reigned from 175–164 bc. The Maccabean revolt arose in reaction to Antiochus’ sacrificing to Zeus in the temple—an event known as the abomination of desolation (; ; ).
Zacharias, H. D. (2016). Antiochus IV Epiphanes. In J. D. Barry, D. Bomar, D. R. Brown, R. Klippenstein, D. Mangum, C. Sinclair Wolcott, … W. Widder (Eds.), The Lexham Bible Dictionary. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
In what follows beyond vs 36 some will see it as a continuation of Antiochus IV Epiphanes carrier. Others will she this as a shift to Antichrist at some point in the future.
v. 21 describes a

“contemptible one”

He is described as the “little horn” foreshadowed in Daniel. He was a usuper. He took the throne from his older nephew. He also continues the ongoing battle between the Ptolomies and the Seludics for control of Palestine. Later in his carrier he suffered a humiliating defeat by the Ptolomies. Later he would unleash his rage on the Jews in Jerusalem. He attacked and massacred them on a Sabbath. He forced Hellenization on them. He outlawed circumcision and many observances. He erected an idol to Zeus in the Jerusalem temple. (this was the abomination that causes desolation in the temple). Thes events divided the Jews into covenant violators and those who firmly resisted. Much is recorded in 1 Macc.

-35

Much debated section. Some will extend to 11.39. Does the revelation continue to talk about Antiochus the IV. Or does it shift to the future to an antichrist figure.
The debate arrises because things get difficult in v.36. for two reasons. The text is difficult to fit with what it says and what what we know and Antiochus the IV. There is debate about the entire nature of this prophecy. That is a question of Genre.

The Text and History of

The difficulty arises from the use of “cosmic language”. Use of the term “the king” in v. 35 is unusual. It becomes very unclear who everyone is in vs. 40.
doesn’t fit within the life of Antiochus. Larger context of Daniel appears to suggest something more. Scholars ofetn point out that prophecy will “telescope” its view of the future.

The Genre of

Prophecy of is very unique. Other prophets are general and fuzzy. This appears to be the most specific. It is next to impossible to get a grasp of Daniel without any knowledge of Second Temple history.

Ex eventu prophecy

“after the fact/event” If this is the case. Daniel is not a forward looking prophecy, but a backward looking history. If nothing else Daniel should encourage us to look a BIG PICTURE. There is a progression from bad to worse. But if it is a genre of this type. Then it is perhaps less precise.

“Just as the ideal king of the Psalms was grounded in the Davidic reality but anticipated the Messianic glory, so the wicked king in the end of Daniel is grounded in the Antichene reality but anticipated the horror of the Antichrist.” -Temper Longman III

Related Media
See more
Related Sermons
See more