Caught in the Crosshairs
Notes
Transcript
Caught in the Crosshairs
Dan. 11:36-45 sermon notes
I. Intro: The End or the Beginning?
I have been reflecting on endings lately. How we feel about endings is heavily
shaped by what led up to the end. If we think about a life as a kind of story,
we can look back at the previous “chapters” and get glimpses of the good God
was doing all along the way. When we lose a loved one, sometimes it takes a
while to “review” those chapters in such a way that our grief is alleviated.
None of us know how much longer our personal story will continue. Whether
you or I are living out the final pages of our story is only known to the Author.
The same is true when we think about the end of the grand story of human
history. The same Author who has written the story of the universe has written
the story of each of our lives. David attested in worship in Psalm 139:16,
“Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one
of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of
them.” I believe that didn’t just apply to David; I believe that applies to every
one of us. But, as we think about the end of our own personal stories, our
individual lives, how should we feel about the end of the grand story?
For Christians, we know that the end of physical life in this world is not the
end of life. But feelings of fear, feelings of sadness, feelings of doubt, feelings
of regret can characterize us as we think about or approach the end of our
lives. Some of what fuels those negative feelings can be the unfamiliarity of
what happens next. We are completely dependent on what we’ve been told in
the Bible for any information to shape our expectations about what we will
experience if we die. But the Bible doesn’t tell us much at all about that
experience, about that reality. Instead, when the Bible talks about what
happens after the end of our individual lives it almost always draws our
attention further out. Rather than informing us about what we will experience
if we die, instead the Bible pushes us to consider what we will experience
after the end of human history. That is “the end” we should all be most
interested in. That is what should shape our hope.
When considering “the end times,” as the Bible occasionally speaks of the
final chapter of human history, we need to pay careful attention to how the
Bible characterizes this reality. The book of Daniel is sometimes pressed into
service to paint vivid pictures of how this final chapter will play out. But we
need to be sensitive to discern whether, when Daniel speaks of “the end,” he
means the end of a particular chapter in history, or the final chapter of human
history. As we come near the end of the book of Daniel, we will recognize
Daniel pointing toward the true conclusion of human history, the resurrection
of the dead. But, the events he describes that lead up to that grand conclusion
may not be what we expect. In our last couple of messages from Daniel,
we’ve begun looking at Daniel’s final visionary experience, which he records
as chapters 10-12 of his book. His introduction to this visionary experience
spanned chapter 10 verse 1 through chapter 11 verse 1, where he explains how
an angel appeared to him to explain an earlier vision he had experienced, and
then he details how the angel pulled back the curtain on some angelic conflict
in heaven. We sought to draw out some implications for our understanding of
spiritual warfare and what it means to live by faith and not by sight.
Then, we have the record of what the angel came to explain to him, from
verse 2 of chapter 11 all the way through verse 3 of chapter 12. In our last
message from this section, we looked at how the angel provided a sketch of
several hundred years of history, from Daniel’s day up to near the end of the
Greek Empire, focusing on the earthly warfare between Syrian kings in the
north and Egyptian kings in the south, with the Jewish people caught in the
crossfire. As we considered the historical fulfillment of this vision, which was
remarkably detailed, but not detailed enough to provide much insight ahead of
time, we noted that the angel’s message zoomed in on the period that would
feature Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the same Greek king represented by the little
horn of the goat in Daniel chapter 8, who aggressively persecuted the Jewish
people, attacking their religious practices in a unique and terrible way. We
noted that there is widespread agreement on the detailed fulfillment of this
prophetic passage, up through the details of verse 35.
But, at verse 36, students of Scripture diverge and split off into a handful of
different interpretations. As we talked about a couple of weeks ago, however,
it’s important to remember that the Spirit-inspired message is not the
historical fulfillment of the passage, but the words he breathed out in these
verses. So, while the fulfillment is fascinating, even if debated, we must draw
our major understanding from the text as it is, even if we can’t agree on who
and how and when the fulfillment has happened or will happen. Since
chapters 10-12 are one unified vision, we can summarize the main message
this way: God rules over the details of the future, even as that future
consists of “wars and rumors of wars,” great tribulation for God’s
people, and the increase of wickedness, all leading, however, to the grand
climax of God’s judgment and the salvation of the remnant in the
resurrection of the dead. Today, we continue with the “wars and rumors of
wars,” the increase of wickedness, and the great tribulation for God’s people,
focusing on chapter 11 verses 36-45.
As we anticipate the glorious conclusion beyond these verses, in chapter 12:13, which we’ll look at next week, let me make one final comment, plea, and
warning about the way we think and talk about “the end times.” For
Christians, “the end” is not really “the end.” If we should die, however
painful, that is only a transition to a better situation. I don’t want to die. I am
not looking forward to it in any way whatsoever. I am looking forward to the
return of my Savior, and I believe the Bible teaches that he could show up on
the white horse at any moment to bring in the real end of human history. And
I would like to be alive for that! I would rather be among the number who
greets the Lord Jesus at his return, alive to be raptured, alive to receive a
glorified body, without having to experience death. That is what I’m looking
forward to. How ‘bout you?
C.S. Lewis said it well at the end of The Last Battle, the grand conclusion of
The Chronicles of Narnia; even though he was describing what happens after
we die, it is right to recognize this present life as only “the cover and the title
page.” It is our resurrection which will be “Chapter One of the Great Story,
which no one on earth has read: which goes on for ever: in which every
chapter is better than the one before.” We can get too hung up, too distracted
by thinking about “life after death”; where we really need to focus our
attention, to put our hope, is in what another British theologian has
characterized as “life after ‘life after death.’” Yes and Amen!
But, before we get there, we need to consider the final historical stretch the
angel reveals to Daniel ahead of time. As we observed last time, there were
unannounced gaps of time throughout the passage. We looked at this chart
briefly two weeks ago. These gaps would be completely unpredictable as
people were living through the fulfillment. The question, then, will be: Does a
gap follow verse 35? And, if so, how large a gap? Let’s consider verses 36-39,
where we get a glimpse of a new character, who I’m calling “the
warmongering Jewish king.” Follow along.
II.
The Warmongering Jewish King (Dan. 11:36-39)
“And the king shall do as he wills. He shall exalt himself and magnify
himself above every god, and shall speak astonishing things against the God
of gods. He shall prosper till the indignation is accomplished; for what is
decreed shall be done. 37 He shall pay no attention to the gods of his fathers, or
to the one beloved by women. He shall not pay attention to any other god, for
he shall magnify himself above all. 38 He shall honor the god of fortresses
instead of these. A god whom his fathers did not know he shall honor with
gold and silver, with precious stones and costly gifts. 39 He shall deal with the
strongest fortresses with the help of a foreign god. Those who acknowledge
him he shall load with honor. He shall make them rulers over many and shall
divide the land for a price.”
36
First, we should notice that the angel draws our attention to a new character.
Throughout this chapter, the angel has referred repeatedly to “the king of the
north” and “the king of the south.” Only here do we read of “the king” without
further description. His initial description—that “he shall do as he wills”—
was the same phrase used to describe Alexander the Great in verse 3 and
Antiochus the Great in verse 16. Many students of Scripture have thought “the
king” must refer back to the most-recently featured king, so that verses 36-39
at least are supposed to still be focusing on Antiochus IV Epiphanes. This is
possible but, in my opinion, unlikely. Two other options are commonly
suggested. Many see a gap after verse 35 that is still ongoing today and thus
suggest that this “king” will be the final Antichrist at the very end of history.
For these folks, everything in our passage today will take place in the sevenyear tribulation period. One writer who sees things this way writes, “Dan
11:36-39 is probably the most instructive passage in the Old Testament about
the nature and mindset of the future antichrist.”
If you’ve been with us at all during this series through Daniel, you probably
are not surprised that this is not my personal understanding of the passage.
But, let me say clearly: this could be a correct understanding of the fulfillment
of this passage. It’s possible that the angel describes a final Antichrist figure
who will yet rise to royal power in the future, shortly before Jesus returns.
That position is completely unverifiable, impossible to prove. That fact, I
think, makes it difficult for someone who holds that position to consider
alternative options. I have heard some people who believe this passage is
talking about the future Antichrist saying that the details described here have
never happened in recorded history. But that is just not true. Given the
vagueness of these descriptions, there are at least two very specific
possibilities that have been suggested that fit the details of the prophecy. I’m
inclined to one of them that I’ll share with you this morning.
The third common suggestion for the historical fulfillment of these verses
recognizes a gap of at least 100 years, focusing on developments within the
Roman Empire, and there are variations on how this looks, but the point to
emphasize is that this view makes much of how all the visions of the book of
Daniel line up. I showed this chart a couple of weeks ago. When we looked at
the Seventy Weeks prophecy at the end of Daniel 9, I suggested that the
fulfillment focuses on the death of the Messiah and the destruction of the
temple; both events took place during the Roman Empire, the fourth kingdom
of Daniel’s earlier visions. Likewise, I believe the historical fulfillment of this
final vision in chapters 10-12 moves into that fourth kingdom, the Roman
Empire. As we’ll see, there are connections between these verses at the end of
chapter 11 and those final two verses of chapter 9, which probably links the
two prophecies, so that the end of chapter 11 is elaborating further details of
what was announced at the end of chapter 9. In light of this, John Calvin
suggested that “the king” of verse 36 represented the whole Roman Empire,
and he didn’t seek to press the details of the fulfillment to specific individuals.
While that approach is not one I share, the suggestion that we’re looking at an
announcement of events that would transpire during the Roman Empire gives
us a place to look in the historical records. I think this examination needs to be
done before concluding that we should view this as announcing a yet-future
Antichrist figure still to come.
So, then, who is this king? In verse 36, he is further described as a selfexalting blasphemer who opposes the true God. Some of the phrases used
remind us of Belshazzar of Babylon, from Daniel 5, and also Antiochus IV
Epiphanes, as he’s characterized in verses 21-35 of this chapter and as the
little horn of the Greek goat in chapter 8. The last sentence of verse 36 returns
us to a concept we saw in chapter 8 and then connects this with the prophecy
of Daniel 9:27. This king “shall prosper till the indignation is accomplished.”
The word translated “indignation” we saw in Daniel 8:19 as a reference to
God’s indignation, God’s wrath being poured out on the Jewish people; after
being restored to the land, after having their temple rebuilt in Jerusalem, they
were still in rebellion against God, and so he used Antiochus IV Epiphanes to
pour out his judgment against them in 167 BC. We should view the term the
same way here in 11:36; this king is going to prosper and be successful until
God finishes pouring out his wrath, not during the days of Antiochus IV
Epiphanes, but at a later time.
Then, the angel adds, “for what is decreed shall be done.” The Hebrew word
translated “decreed” only appears two other places in Daniel: in chapter 9
verses 26-27, and there what was decreed had to do with the destruction of
Jerusalem and the temple. Also, the word translated “accomplished” here in
11:36 is the same word translated “end” at the end of 9:27. All in all, the
connections between this verse and Daniel 9:26-27 leads me to conclude that
the two passages are probably connected in such a way that the historical
fulfillment is the same for both.
These connections usually lead folks to conclude that “the king” must be a
Roman Emperor, but it is better to recognize that he will be a ruler who rules
during the Roman Empire. And verse 37 leads us to believe that he will be a
Jewish king; the opening phrase says, in the ESV, “He shall pay no attention
to the gods of his fathers.” That rendering is what you’ll find in most modern
versions. But the KJV and the NKJV have instead, “the God of his fathers,”
with a capital “G”. This exact phrase appears more than 40 times in the Old
Testament, and every other time it is clear that the one spoken of is Yahweh,
the God of Israel.
The second characterization in verse 37 is harder to pin down. Not only will
this Jewish king pay no respect to Yahweh, the one true God, but he also will
not pay attention to “the one beloved by women.” The meaning of this phrase
is debated heavily, and it is quite ambiguous. It could be referring to a
particular false god popularly worshiped by women. Thus, for a Jewish king,
it could be suggesting that he will not be drawn into idolatry by women, the
way former kings in Israel’s history were, like Solomon or Ahab. Or, the
phrase could be translated as in the NKJV, he will pay no attention to “the
desire of women.” In addition to his unusual religious devotion, which will be
elaborated in verse 38, he also has a twisted perspective regarding women. It
is interesting how often these two realities are connected in people’s lives.
When a man’s relationship with God is broken, or when his understanding of
who God is is skewed, often there is a parallel brokenness in his relationship
and view of women. Jewish kings were supposed to be protectors of women.
In any case, this Jewish king will be very unlike previous Jewish kings, even
the worst ones from the Old Testament.
Well, if this Jewish king abandons Yahweh and doesn’t give his devotion
even to any of the traditional idols of the past, what does his religious
devotion look like? Verse 38 characterizes his worship as directed to “the god
of fortresses.” This may be to some degree metaphorical. This Jewish king
would invest tons of money and resources into warfare, and how true it is that
what we spend our money on can certainly reveal a lot about what or who
we’re really worshiping.
In verse 39, this “foreign god,” foreign from the Jewish perspective, of course,
is credited with providing help for this Jewish king to gain military victories.
And, in the wake of his successes, he will gain a following, which he will
further secure by appointing people to positions of leadership and giving them
plots of territory within the land. What land? Probably, specifically, the land
in and surrounding the city of Jerusalem.
So, with that summary look at the details, allow me to sketch out what I
believe was the most likely fulfillment of these verses. “The king” introduced
here is no rightful “king of the Jews,” but he is a man named John of Gischala,
a leader of the Jewish Zealots who elevated himself as ruler of the Jews in
Jerusalem, claimed the temple as his fortress, and used money from the temple
treasury to fund his military operations. Like Belshazzar, from Daniel 5, he
even misused the sacred vessels of the temple as a parallel means of exalting
himself against the one true God. As one writer puts it, “This character will
make Belshazzar look humble.”
Certainly, John thought he was serving the one true God’s interests. However,
the zealots’ expectations of a warrior Messiah to bring a military-style
conquest led them to have a distorted image of Yahweh. They had essentially
turned Yahweh into an idol, just as the Jewish leaders of old, the Jewish
leaders who wound up in exile in Babylon, had turned the temple itself into an
idol. Whereas the Jewish leaders during Jesus’s lifetime had transformed the
temple from a “house of prayer for all the nations” into a “den of thieves” by
their economic abuse of the worshipers, John and the zealots transformed the
temple from a place of worship into a military compound. If the temple is
transformed into a fortress, then the soldiers garrisoned there must view
Yahweh as a “god of fortresses.” Yahweh, the one true God, may be our
fortress, but we must not turn a fortress into our god.
The issue mentioned regarding either “the one desired by women” or “the
desire of women,” as I said, is unclear. If the reference has to do with his view
of women, it is interesting to observe how history has recorded the way John
of Gischala specifically abandoned women and children while fleeing from
the Romans, and, as a policy, he seemed to allow and even encourage his
followers to rape women for sport. John’s obsession was clearly military
power, and he was brutal and vile, no better than the wicked Greek, Antiochus
IV Epiphanes!
Finally, John is known to have granted authority in Jerusalem to twenty of his
military officers, and it is possible, though uncertain from the historical
records, that he may have promised plots of land to those in his army as
payment for their service, confident of his ultimate victory. All of this took
place in the warfare now known as the Jewish Revolt of 67-70 AD. Thus,
between verse 35 and verse 36, we may see a gap of about 230 years. This
lengthier gap would parallel the first lengthy gap we observed in the chapter
of about 135 years between verses 2 and 3. This historical sketch lines up in
its details with the details of the prophecy just as well as any of the earlier
sections in the prophecy. There are other proposals within the Roman Empire
that work pretty well, but this is how I currently see things having unfolded.
But what of “the end” in the next paragraph? Let’s look at verses 40-45,
where we see the end of the Jewish temple.
III.
The End of the Jewish Temple (Dan. 11:40-45)
“At the time of the end, the king of the south shall attack him, but the king
of the north shall rush upon him like a whirlwind, with chariots and horsemen,
and with many ships. And he shall come into countries and shall overflow and
pass through. 41 He shall come into the glorious land. And tens of thousands
shall fall, but these shall be delivered out of his hand: Edom and Moab and the
main part of the Ammonites. 42 He shall stretch out his hand against the
countries, and the land of Egypt shall not escape. 43 He shall become ruler of
the treasures of gold and of silver, and all the precious things of Egypt, and
the Libyans and the Cushites shall follow in his train. 44 But news from the
east and the north shall alarm him, and he shall go out with great fury to
destroy and devote many to destruction. 45 And he shall pitch his palatial tents
between the sea and the glorious holy mountain. Yet he shall come to his end,
with none to help him.”
40
As I’ve said, when we see the phrase “the end” in Daniel, we need to ask “the
end of what”? I’ve tipped my hand already in the sermon outline; I believe
we’re seeing the end of the temple described here. But there’s more going on
than just that. They’re back! The king of the north and the king of the south
have returned in verse 40! Did you miss them? Whereas throughout the
chapter we’ve seen them at war with each other, with the Jewish people stuck
in the middle, here we see them allied again. I say “again” because the
passage actually started with them on the same team. All the way back in
verse 5, the king of the south has one of his princes pull away from him; this
“prince” becomes the king of the north, whose descendants feature in the rest
of the passage.
But now, we’ve experienced another shift. Just as between verses 2-3 we
moved out of the Persian Empire and into the Greek Empire (with a skipping
of 135 years), so here we’ve moved out of the Greek Empire and into the
Roman Empire (with a skipping of 230 years between verses 35 and 36).
Now, north and south are united again under the banner of the Roman Empire,
and they are united in opposition against “the king” we’ve been reading about
in the previous verses. Thus, Jerusalem and the Jews are no longer simply
“caught in the crossfire”; they are now squarely set “in the crosshairs,”
particularly of Rome. Forces from the north and forces from the south will
converge on Jerusalem, but, as verse 41 indicates, curiously “Edom and Moab
and the main part of the Ammonites” will not be ravaged in the midst of this
warfare. Why are they mentioned? Aren’t they some of Israel’s historic
enemies from the distant past? What’s their relevance here?
At the end of verse 42, we get another mysterious mention of another ancient
enemy of Israel. That last phrase is ambiguous. The ESV says, “and the land
of Egypt shall not escape.” Young’s Literal Translation has instead, “and the
land of Egypt is not for an escape.” So, is the angel announcing that, during
this war, Egypt will be untouched, or is he saying that Egypt will not be a
place the Jewish people can escape to? It could go either way, but verse 43
might tip us in favor of the second view, since the king of the north is
described as plundering the Egyptians and also conquering Libya and Cush,
other north African nations.
And, in verse 44, we seem to be starting from the vantage point of Egypt;
while the king of the north is in Egypt, he hears a report of trouble in
Jerusalem, northeast of Egypt, and so he marches his forces into Jerusalem for
a final assault that will put down the rebellion finally. Verse 45 describes him
setting up military encampments between the Mediterranean Sea and the
temple in Jerusalem. The last sentence is most ambiguous, and because of its
ambiguity we need to be very tentative about what it means. Most versions
have what the ESV has: “Yet he shall come to his end, with none to help
him.” This way of reading the Hebrew suggests that the angel is announcing
the doom of the king of the north, who has been so dominant in this
paragraph. And that is possible. However, the word translated “yet” may
simply be “and,” not indicating a contrast. And, instead of “he,” “his,” and
“him,” it is just as likely that we should read “it.” So, we could translate that
last sentence as, “And it shall come to its end, with none to help it.” I believe
this is more likely and is therefore referring to the temple, “the glorious holy
mountain.” This would again line up exactly with Daniel 9:26, which spoke of
the end of the city and the sanctuary: “Its end shall come with a flood,” and
this flood language may connect, then, with the description of the king of the
north’s “overflowing” in 11:40.
So, as I read this passage, I see its historical fulfillment in 70 AD, focusing on
the warfare that resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. Just
prior to the Jewish Revolt beginning, in 66 AD, the Roman Emperor Nero had
appointed a fellow by the name of Tiberius Julius Alexander as prefect or
“client king” of Egypt. This would be “the king of the south.” He would join
forces with the main Roman armies in 70 AD, serving as second-in-command
to General Titus, under Emperor Vespasian’s command. Emperor Vespasian
is the proper “king of the north,” and he sent his legions under the command
of his son Titus to put down this revolt of the Jews. Shortly before 70 AD,
Emperor Vespasian himself, leading some of his forces into Egypt, he made
alliances with the region formerly known as Edom, Moab, and Ammon
(modern-day Sudan), or at least part of Ammon, so that they volunteered
soldiers to the Roman cause, even though they didn’t actually become a
Roman province at that time. It was while Emperor Vespasian was in Egypt
that he heard news that the Jewish zealots had barricaded themselves inside
the temple in Jerusalem and that the city itself had become a militarized zone,
and the Jewish soldiers were holding out in defense of the temple. And, in
response to this report, he sent word to Titus to finish them off, who would
lead his forces in from the north, while Julius Tiberius Alexander would send
a military contingent from the south in Egypt.
Also, they employed ships from their navy in the Dead Sea in order to close
off Jewish retreat, as well as transport ships sailing up the Nile River, as
indicated in the summary description of verse 40. Moreover, Egypt was not
accessible to Jews for a place of escape; history indicates that Tiberius Julius
Alexander slaughtered Jews living in Alexandria and also sent his forces from
the south to march against Jerusalem itself. Again, with remarkably detailed
accuracy, this prophecy even speaks of only “the main part of Ammon” siding
with the king of the north; historically, this seems to reflect the reality that
Emperor Vespasian only conquered by warfare one small region of the land
formerly known as Ammon; the rest gladly pledged their allegiance to Rome
and sent hundreds of troops to the Roman army. These forces successfully
destroy the temple and conquer Jerusalem, fulfilling both the general
prophecy of Daniel 9:26-27 and this more detailed prophecy of Daniel 11:4045.
Thus, “the end” referred to in verse 40 I believe is the same “end” we read
about in Daniel 9:26, the end of the temple in Jerusalem. Next week, we will
consider how this connects with the rise of Michael, the time of trouble, the
deliverance of Daniel’s people, the resurrection of the dead, and the shining of
the wise highlighted in the next three verses. In the meantime, as we close this
morning, let’s consider why the God who knows the end from the beginning
chooses to tell his people about the future at all. What is biblical prophecy
for?
IV. Conclusion: What Is Biblical Prophecy For?
Perhaps this question should’ve been raised earlier in our study of Daniel. The
prophet Isaiah gives us our starting point. In Isaiah 46:8-10, we read:
8
9
10
“Remember this and stand firm,
recall it to mind, you transgressors,
remember the former things of old;
for I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is none like me,
declaring the end from the beginning
and from ancient times things not yet done,
saying, ‘My counsel shall stand,
and I will accomplish all my purpose,’
That God announces “things not yet done” in order to “accomplish all [his]
purpose” makes him different from all the gods human beings invent. That he
does this is not the question, however. Why does he reveal, ahead of time,
some of the things he plans to do? Why does he reveal to his people in
Scripture some events that will play out in history before they actually
happen? We could, of course, apply 2 Timothy 3:16-17 at this point, since
prophecy is part of Scripture. Paul writes, “All Scripture is breathed out by
God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in
righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every
good work.” Prophecy is supposed to do all those things for God’s people. Or,
we could recall Paul’s words in Romans 15:4, “For whatever was written in
former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and
through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.” Even
prophecy is supposed to provide encouragement and hope for those who read
it.
But I can think of at least three specific reasons the Lord has chosen to
announce some events ahead of time in Scripture.
A. Demonstrates that Yahweh is God Alone
First, as Isaiah 46:8-11 indicated, prophecy written and recorded ahead of
time as the word of the Lord demonstrates that Yahweh is the one true God.
The gods of other nations, which the people of Israel had been drawn away to
worship, could not declare ahead of time “things not yet done,” because they
did not really exist. So, biblical prophecy demonstrates that Yahweh can
reveal the future with certainty, which implies that he is in control of those
events. After the fulfillment of prophecies happen, God’s people are able to
recognize God’s sovereignty, faithfulness, and trustworthiness. He does what
he says he will do, and nothing and no one can stop him.
B. Provides a Proper Perspective
Second, prophecy provides a proper perspective for readers who go through
the events prophesied. Think of the Jews who were taken into exile by the
Babylonians. If they didn’t have the numerous written prophecies that they
were going to be taken into exile as an act of Yahweh’s judgment against their
disobedience, rebellion, and idolatry, they might’ve believed the popular
media of the day that was saying the gods of Babylon had defeated Yahweh in
heavenly combat, and that is why Yahweh’s people had been conquered. The
Lord gave them the key to properly interpret what was happening to them
when it happened. Also, the prophecies indicated the timeframe they’d be in
exile and included promises of their restoration. As the Jews lived in Babylon,
if they believed the prophecies, they could’ve lived faithfully trusting the
Lord; they could’ve experienced encouragement instead of despair, and they
could’ve lived with a dynamic expectation of the good the Lord had promised.
C. Validates God’s Prophets
Third, since prophecy is recorded by human spokesmen, when the fulfillment
comes, the prophet himself is validated as God’s prophet. In Deuteronomy 18,
the Lord lays out the expectations the people should have of prophets.
Announcing future events was not the primary job of prophets, but when they
do speak of future events, as revealed to them by the Lord, if those events
don’t happen, they are judged to be false prophets, and the Mosaic Law
indicated that they should be executed for their presumption. The key passage
is Deuteronomy 18:20-22:
20
But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not
commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same
prophet shall die. 21 And if you say in your heart, “How may we know the
word that Yahweh has not spoken?”— 22 when a prophet speaks in the name
of Yahweh, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that
Yahweh has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need
not be afraid of him.
That word translated “be afraid” is not the normal word for fear in the Old
Testament. It’s a rare word that is sometimes translated as “be intimidated” or
“stand in awe” of someone. God’s people should not be impressed when
someone claims to be a prophet, claims to speak a message from the Lord
about future events, and those events don’t come to pass. That is a
marvelously relevant word for the church still today.
But when it comes to prophecy in Scripture, we find ourselves mystified
oftentimes. One writer has asked all the right questions about our modern-day
combination of frustration and fascination with biblical prophecy: “Why is
prophecy a closed book, with people saying, ‘I read it because it’s in the
Bible, but I don’t understand what I’m reading’? Why do seminarians find the
book of Revelation intimidating? Why is prophecy subject to disagreement?
Why do churches take sides and divide over eschatology? Why do scholars
with similar methods of interpretation fail to agree about significant aspects of
prophecy?”
Daniel chapter 11 is a unique chapter in biblical prophecy. It stands apart in its
length, its detail, and, once the fulfillment is sketched out, its clear alignment
with historical events. But, as we pointed out a couple of weeks ago, someone
reading the prophecy before the fulfillment came to pass could not have been
prepared by this passage to anticipate what would happen ahead of time.
There is a vagueness in the way these events are described that is very much
like other biblical prophecy. This passage is not poetry, but it is full of poetic
devices and figurative language. And the most obvious features that are also
the most annoying features for us readers are that the characters are not
named, the time periods are not specified, and God is not depicted as speaking
or even acting directly in the passage.
Sometimes we use the word “prediction” of passages like Daniel 11, or we
speak of “predictive prophecy.” But biblical prophecy is not the same thing as
“prediction.” First of all, prediction always implies a possibility that what is
predicted may not happen. Biblical prophecy is both less and more than
prediction. It is less than prediction because, typically, it does not lay out the
details of a sequence of events. Even Daniel 11, as many details as it includes
about events that would happen hundreds of years after the prophecy was
given, the details are vague, non-specific, and couched in figurative language.
But it is more than prediction because God, as the revealer of the prophecy, is
actually revealing events that are part of his overarching plan for history, and
he is in a position to see to it that these things actually happen. When the
fulfillment comes, when the announced events begin unfolding in our world,
in our experience, God is involved in the events to ensure that they go
according to plan. Now, when I say that, don’t envision God as the grand
puppet-master, pulling the strings of human puppets, or as the person on the
heavenly control room, manipulating the actions of individuals like robots or
characters in a video game by flipping switches or pushing buttons. God
involves himself in the events of history, in the events of our everyday lives,
in a splendid variety of ways, and none of those ways should be imagined as
coercive, forceful, or manipulative, as though we could charge God with evil
in the way he “works all things according to the counsel of his will,” to quote
Ephesians 1:11. How he sees to it that everything goes according to plan while
human beings make genuine, free, responsible choices should remain
mysterious to us, but, if we are to be faithful to Scripture, we must not reject
either his sovereign control or humans’ responsible actions.
Second, biblical prophecy is not prediction because it either explicitly states or
consistently implies God’s involvement in the events described. Rather than
simply predicting events, disconnected from his own action, God is revealing
ahead of time his intentions, and the Scriptures repeatedly attest to God’s
unchallengeable ability to accomplish his intentions.
Third, we shouldn’t think of biblical prophecy as primarily focused on
prediction because the fact of coming events is rarely, if ever, the point, the
message of an individual prophecy. We must always be hunting for the
answer to the question, “Why did he tell them this ahead of time?” Even the
prophet, when he first received a message from the Lord that included an
announcement of future events, wouldn’t have known what the fulfillment
would look like. But the fulfillment is not the message! I know that I have
bored some of you, overwhelmed others of you, and frustrated a few of you by
laying out the historical fulfillment of Daniel’s visionary experiences. And I
genuinely apologize. Especially with this morning’s passage, I have chosen to
sketch out the historical fulfillment as I understand it with such detail for two
main reasons: 1) because I suspect, for most of you, the historical details
surrounding the destruction of the temple are unfamiliar, and thus you might
never have heard how those events could’ve been the historical fulfillment of
biblical prophecy; and 2) as I mentioned earlier, if you’ve always thought or
been told that this passage doesn’t match anything in known history and it
probably points forward to the very end of history and hasn’t been fulfilled
yet, then you’d never think to pursue other possibilities.
The end of the temple in 70 AD is an important fulfillment of biblical
prophecy. I believe the events leading up to that climactic destruction were
announced by Gabriel in Daniel 9:25-27 and by this anonymous angel in
Daniel 11:36-45. But, even if I’m wrong about that, Jesus himself, just a few
days before he was crucified, announced this event ahead of time, and the
records of that announcement from Matthew, Mark, and Luke reflect Jesus
using the language of these passages in Daniel. At Jesus’s death, God himself
attested to the imminent destruction of the temple. In a sign-act direct from
God, with no human involvement, as soon as Jesus took his last breath on the
cross, we read in Mark 15:38, “And the curtain of the temple was torn in two,
from top to bottom.” There’s that passive voice again. Who tore the huge,
magnificent, thick curtain that separated the Holy of Holies from the Holy
Place? Who ripped that curtain from top to bottom? God did. I wish we had a
record of the priests’ reaction when they saw it! I wonder if anyone saw it as it
happened, or if they came in and found it that way.
What did this miraculous sign intend to communicate? This curtain was a
barrier, a barrier that separated God from people, even his own Jewish people!
Only one person, once a year, was allowed to pass through that curtain: the
high priest on the Day of Atonement. When we remember that, we can learn
at least two important truths. First, the final Day of Atonement sacrifice has
been offered and accepted on behalf of sinners! The author of Hebrews tells
us something that we could not know otherwise, something no human
witnessed. Hebrews 6:19-20 reveals, “We have this as a sure and steadfast
anchor of the soul, a hope that enters into the inner place behind the curtain, 20
where Jesus has gone as a forerunner on our behalf, having become a high
priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.” Jesus is our great, eternal high
priest, and, when he died, he entered the holy place of the heavenly
tabernacle, offering the final Day of Atonement sacrifice—himself, as the
spotless Lamb of God! He didn’t carry the mere blood of an animal into the
mere earthly Holy of Holies of the mere temple in Jerusalem to merely
provide forgiveness for merely the sins of Jewish people for merely the
previous year! Oh no! He allowed his own blood to be poured out; he offered
his own perfect fully human life as a sacrifice, and he—the sacrificed one!—
entered God’s throne room and presented himself to God as a sacrifice to
provide forgiveness for all the sins of all who would believe in him, Jews and
Gentiles alike—past, present, and future! Thus, the temple in Jerusalem is
garbage to be discarded, under the judgment of God. After that Good Friday,
no animal sacrifice would ever be accepted by God again.
Second, God himself destroyed the barrier between sinners and God. God
announced the end of the temple to Daniel through angels and to the disciples
through Jesus. God also announced the end of the temple to the world by
tearing this curtain. As much as the temple in Jerusalem was the place where
God chose for his name to dwell, as much as the temple in Jerusalem was to
be the emblem of God’s presence with his people, the physical temple was
never God’s intended endgame. The physical temple was always an
accommodation to human weakness and limitation, and it was never to be
viewed as sufficient. Solomon said, the day the first temple was finished, in 1
Kings 8:27, “But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the
highest heaven cannot contain you; how much less this house that I have
built!” God’s presence with his people was intended to be more direct, more
intimate, more permanent. Thus, at the beginning of his ministry, before he
had developed a reputation, when Jesus spoke in the temple and said, in John
2:19, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up,” he was already
indicating that he himself was the embodiment of God’s presence. John has to
make clear, even to his Christian readers, that Jesus was referring to “the
temple of his body,” and certainly Jesus’s hearers didn’t get that. But the point
here is that God destroyed the barrier between sinners and God, so that, since
that day, sinful Jews and sinful Gentiles can have full, unhindered access to
God, but only in and through the true temple, Jesus Christ.
Ultimately, biblical prophecy all points to Jesus. Even the announcement of
the conflicts between Greek kings that pulls God’s people into the crossfire
reminds the Jewish people that they are under God’s judgment, and it’s Jesus
the Messiah alone who would solve that problem. And even the destruction of
the temple is really about Jesus. The physical temple must be removed, must
be eliminated, lest it be seen as a rival to Jesus. The earliest Christians did
indeed meet in the temple in Jerusalem for a time. But they were not meeting
there because that was “God’s house.” No; they understood that Jesus was
God’s temple and that they—the early church—was God’s new house. There
will never be a need for God’s people to have a physical temple ever again.
We Christians will always need places to gather, but these buildings are not
temples, and this room is not a sanctuary! Immanuel has come; God is with
us, forever! He has sent his Spirit to live in every believer, and that means
each of us and all of us gathered together are the fulfillment of everything the
temple stood for and pointed toward. God is with us; God is in us. Trust in
Jesus and you’ll never be alone ever again.