DANIEL
Week 31, Chapter 11

We managed to get only as far as the first 4 verses of Daniel 11 last week. Recall that what we
are reading is an oracle delivered to Daniel by an unnamed angel or spiritual being. This is
NOT Daniel pronouncing this prophecy; he is only relaying to us what that heavenly
messenger said to him.
The time is around 535 B.C. and Media-Persia is now the reigning gentile world empire. Cyrus
the Great (a Persian) is the king and he is in his 3
rd
year in power. Daniel is no longer in the
employ of the royal palace.
Verses 1-4 told us that 3 Persian kings would reign and then a 4
th
Persian king would arise
who was very wealthy (history proves that this was King Xerxes); and this king’s unmatched
wealth would be used to construct a Persian army meant to conquer and expand the empire.
One of Xeroxes’ goals was the conquest of Greece. However after trying many times and
having only partial success, the prophecy says that a Greek king would arise who would turn
the tables and wind up attacking and conquering Persia. Thus the 2
nd
gentile world empire
(Media-Persia) gives way to the 3
rd
gentile world empire: Greece. And history proves that this
victorious Greek king was Alexander the Great. He died as a very young man (32 years old),
left behind no children (even though his wife Roxanne was pregnant with a son at the time of
his death), and so as the passage predicts, the Greek Empire was divided up into 4 districts,
each ruled by its own king. And none of these rulers was a relative of Alexander’s.
I want to spend a few moments talking about the term Greece. We’re going to get a bit
technical, but I think this is something that in the long run helps you to navigate the Bible, and it
is important to help us understand Bible prophecy as it was originally written and intended
versus how it is popularly spoken about today. As used here in Daniel the term Greece is what
is called an anachronism. That is, while hundreds of years later on this region or kingdom that
would become an empire would be called Greece, it wasn’t at the time of Daniel. In fact, the
word Greece doesn’t appear in the Book of Daniel. Bible translators have added the word
Greece in place of the original Hebrew. And the word that they replaced is Yavan, or as we’ll
see it in Bible Encyclopedias, the English-ized form is Javan. Let’s briefly look at Genesis 10
and the well-known Table of Nations because it is here that we find the origins of the territory
of Javan.
CJB
Genesis 10:1 Here is the genealogy of the sons of Noach- Shem, Ham and Yefet;
sons were born to them after the flood.
1 / 9

2
The sons of Yefet were Gomer, Magog, Madai, Yavan, Tuval, Meshekh and Tiras.

3
The sons of Gomer were Ashkenaz, Rifat and Togarmah.

4
The sons of Yavan were Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim and Dodanim.

5
From these the islands of the nations were divided into their lands, each according to
its language, according to their families, in their nations.
Yavan was a son of Japheth and grandson of Noah. Yavan was Japheth’s 4
th
son. When we
look at a map of the region in the form of the Table of the Nations as given in Genesis 10, it
helps us to understand what the people of Daniel’s day envisioned as the region that our
English Bibles usually mislabel as Greece. And while the territory of Javan certainly doesn’t
include the entire region assigned to his father Japheth, it does include large areas of the Near
East and the Eastern Mediterranean. It even includes the island of Crete (Kittim), and goes as
far west as Tarshish in modern day Spain (notice that Kittim and Tarshish were 2 sons of
Javan). Some Bibles will call Greece “Macedonia”, but that too is quite incorrect as Macedonia
was only a relatively small kingdom at the time of Daniel, which grew and became more
powerful by the time of Alexander’s father, Phillip. It would be like calling the United States
“New York”.
Alexander was born a Macedonian. But he conquered all the territories surrounding
Macedonia. Technically this only expanded Macedonia’s boundaries but upon that expansion
the word used for his growing empire was in Hebrew Yavan (Javan), not Greece and not
Macedonia. In Sanskrit Yavan was translated to Yavana, which when translated to the
Macedonian language became Ionia. Later this empire became called Hellas (from where we
get the term Hellenization, which means the introduction of Greek culture). The word Greece in
reality is only an English translation of the Latin word Graecia, which referred to the empire of
Hellas (Greece). How it is that Hellas got translated into Latin as Graecia is anybody’s guess.
I tell you all this because while it sure simplifies matters to just drop in the term Greece in our
Bibles and talk about the Greek Empire, nobody until the late days of Rome in the 4
th
or 5
th
centuries A.D. ( perhaps 9 centuries after the time of Daniel) would have ever heard the term
Graecia or Greece, and it obscures the reality that the Bible uses the term Javan (not Greece)
because it helps us to understand that this was part of the territory assigned to Noah’s son
Japheth shortly after the Great Flood. And we learn that the territory of Javan is significantly
more expansive than only Greece or Macedonia. So when speaking of the Greek Empire
prophetically, we need to cross out that word and go back to using Javan, as taken from the
Table of Nations, because that is the term used in the prophecy and it more accurately defines
the territory that is being referred to. If you are serious about Bible prophecy, as opposed to
only enjoying the dramatic teachings of some well meaning modern prophecy teachers, and
the resultant array of denominational End Times doctrines, then this is the route we must take.
Admittedly it takes a little more work to go about it this way, but we’ll also arrive at something
much closer to the truth.
Now before we dive in to the remainder of chapter 11 I want to explain my approach and why I
2 / 9

want to go this direction. Most of this chapter explains the next several centuries of history in
the terms of wars and conflicts between the King of the North against the King of the South.
And much of this prophecy can be explained right down to the various kings and potentates
and nations involved, because most of this is history past and it is well documented with only a
few disagreements over the details. However, some of the prophecy hasn’t happened at all, or
has only partially happened. And as we discussed last time, that is because this prophecy of
chapters 11 and 12 has intermingled 3 different eras: the first latter days, the second latter
days, and the End of Days (the End Times) that results from the second latter days. And this is
essentially also what happened in the prophecies concerning the Messiah, so it was quite
difficult to place the various aspects of Messiah’s work on earth into eras. In fact, most of the
ancient Jewish religious authorities saw it as concerning only 1 era, and thus they
misunderstood Messiah’s mission. So my goal is to untangle this prophecy of Daniel 11 and
12 and try to demonstrate as best I can which of these prophetic events belong in which era. I
readily admit that I can’t be 100% certain; and I will also tell you that God is a God of patterns,
so the first playing out of these events sets the pattern for the next time they play out. The first
latter days is a type and shadow of the second latter days.
Therefore while I will necessary have to speak of history and kings and territories, I’m going to
do it in a summary fashion or I’ll have your eyes rolling into the back of your heads. Even with
this Reader’s Digest version it is a complex matter; however it is not necessary that we
approach it too deeply as do History scholars in order to gain a solid understanding.
So with that open your Bibles to Daniel chapter 11, and we’re going to re-read this in sections.
RE-READ DANIEL 11:5 – 20
As a rule we can take the term “south” to mean Egypt. So the king of the South is usually
referring to the king of Egypt. Where this can get a bit confusing is that we have been used to
thinking of the king of Egypt as an Egyptian Pharaoh. But by the time of Alexander the Great
that was no longer the case. Egypt was conquered and so there were non-Egyptian kings
ruling over Egypt.
The North, then, refers to areas north of Egypt, and generally (but not entirely) to areas north
of the Holy Lands. And the way we are to understand this juxtaposition is that the king of the
north will constantly engage in battles with the king of Egypt, as we see throughout Daniel
chapter 11.
Historically speaking, it is well documented that when Alexander the Great died his Empire
became divided into 4 districts. The Ptolemy family dynasty ruled over Egypt. The first Ptolemy
to acquire Egypt and to rule over it was Ptolemy Soter. He is the king of the south of verse 5.
The prince that eventually gained power over Ptolemy Soter was a man named Seleucus, a
particularly adept general under Alexander the Great. Seleucus at first acquired the district that
was Babylon. However in no time a fellow named Antigonus took Babylon from him. Seleucus
fled for his life to Ptolemy in Egypt. Ptolemy appointed him a general in his army, and later as
allies were able to wrest the Babylonian district away from Antigonus and back into Seleucus’s
3 / 9

hands.
The Seleucus family dynasty, then, became the rulers of the north and their reach and power
far exceeded that of the Ptolemy family dynasty of the south (of Egypt).
Verse 6 says that after some undefined number of years passed an alliance is formed between
the kings of the north and south. A daughter of the king of the south will be the token of the
alliance. This has to be referring to marriage, which is the age old way of sealing alliances
between nations. And historically we find that about 35 years after the death of Seleucus, the
1
st
king of the north, his grandson Antiochus II will marry Berenice a daughter of Ptolemy.
However Berenice had a rival for power; Laodice. Laodice was already a wife of to Antiochus;
and when Antiochus married Berenice for political purposes Laodice set about to get rid of her.
Two years after the marriage, Berenice’s father Ptolemy died and with it the political need for
the marriage. Antiochus divorced Berenice. And in something resembling the old TV series
Dallas, the conniving Laodice had no intention of having her favorable situation undone again.
So she poisoned her husband Antiochus in retribution, and then had Berenice and her infant
son murdered. Laodice now owned the throne of the kingdom of the north.
However verse 7 explains that someone in Berenice’s ancestry will regain power (in the south)
and then come against the king of north. The reference is to another of the Ptolemy family
dynasty, her brother, Ptolemy Euergetes. He takes Egypt’s army, marches to the north, and in
the process avenges his sister Berenice by killing the queen of the north, Laodice. Then in
verse 8, we hear that the king of the south will bring fabulous booty from the north back to
Egypt and have great success for years against the king of the north.
The Egyptians were so awed by the success of this 3
rd
Ptolemy to rule over them that they
gave him the nickname of Euergetes, which means well-doer.
Next, verse 9 explains that the king of the north had enough of this domination of the king of
Egypt and so took an army to attack the king of Egypt (the king of the south). But the king of
the north was defeated and he retreated home. His name was Seleucus Callinicus; he
marched against Ptolemy about 240 B.C., and was lucky to return home alive.
Family being what it is, verse 10 explains that the sons of the king of the north didn’t like it that
their father was defeated and so decided to do something about it themselves. Two sons of
Seleucus Callinicus, Ceraunus and Antiochus the Great, began a war campaign to recover the
honor of their family. Cernaunus was killed in the process, but Antiochus the Great eventually
marched upon Egypt with a huge, irresistible force of troops from the north. But according to
verse 11 the king of the south doesn’t take this attack lying down and advances to meet the
king of the north in battle. It happened exactly as predicted. The next Ptolemy to rule Egypt,
Ptolemy Philopator, enraged at the hubris of Antiochus organized a battle force of 70,000
infantry, 5,000 horsemen, and 73 elephants. In response the king of the north raised an even
bigger multitude of soldiers and when the two kings met in battle Antiochus was defeated and
the king of the south Ptolemy Philopater won decisively. According to Polybius Antiochus lost
10,000 infantry, 300 cavalry, and 5 elephants. In addition over 4000 of his troops were taken
prisoner.
4 / 9

However as predicted by the prophecy in Daniel, the results of this astounding outcome were
soon squandered by Ptolemy as he sought to live a life of ease and luxury and allowed his
Egyptian military to become weak and disorganized. Therefore, verse 13 prophecies that the
king of north, Antiochus, shall again gather a multitude, even more formidable than before, and
again attack the king of Egypt. This actually happened; it was about 13 years later and Ptolemy
Philopator was now dead. His only son, his heir, was only 4 years old.
The king of the north, Antiochus the Great, was nothing if not persistent. He had created an
alliance with Phillip the king of Macedonia, and also some rebel factions in Egypt who wanted
to effect some political change in Egypt. So in verse 15 the prophecy is that the king of north,
now feeling powerful again, would re-start his war against Egypt beginning with capturing a
fortified city. Records indicate that this was probably the city of Sidon; however it might have
been Gaza, much further south. Ptolemy, king of Egypt, reacted by sending his best general,
Scopas, to try and recover his lost territory. He failed.
Verse 16 now tells of the downfall of the king of the north. Dr. Kiel puts it this way: “Having
reached the height of victory (Antiochus the Great) falls under the dominion of pride and
haughtiness by which he hastens on his ruin and overthrow.” The land of Glory means the
Holy Lands, which is where Antiochus’s surrender to the forces of the south will come.
But then verse 17 says that Antiochus will give a daughter to the king of the south in order to
seal a treaty. That daughter is Cleopatra, who was given to Ptolemy (this is not the same
Cleopatra of Hollywood movie fame). However the marriage couldn’t be finalized for several
years because it wasn’t sexually consummated. And this is because this particular Ptolemy
that Cleopatra we given to was only 7 years old at the time. No doubt Antiochus’s hope was
that by using his daughter Cleopatra he could infiltrate and heavily influence this mere child
she had married. It didn’t work. Cleopatra sided with her child-husband and worked against
her father Antiochus.
Verse 18 explains how Antiochus suffered yet another defeat. But this time it was brought
about by a new player: a Roman. The prophecy is that the king of north will now try to extend
his influence to the “isles” (meaning the islands of the Mediterranean). And sure enough,
history reveals that a Roman magistrate named Lucius Asiaticus defeated Antiochus’s forces.
This was a huge humiliation for Antiochus as his forces should have been far superior to those
that these islands could have mustered. But then verse 19 speaks of the end of the power of
the king of north. Indeed, Antiochus returned home, a defeated and humiliated king, and now
vulnerable spent the next few years merely trying to keep hold of his throne. We hear no more
of him after this time.
I want to stop and take a breath as we’ve moved quickly through history, because I don’t want
us to miss an important point. Everything in chapter 11 is described as future events to Daniel;
these are things that were yet to happen. There is no verb confusion, no misunderstanding of
tenses. Everything we read was to happen well after the time of Daniel. Therefore, for even
those conservative and fundamental Christian scholars who have fallen prey to the seminary
teaching that the Book of Daniel was written around the time of Antiochus Epiphanies (about
165 B.C.), there is a problem. Because if the writer of Daniel lived at a time AFTER all these
5 / 9

events I’ve just described to you, then he is a king-sized liar. He is deceiving his readers by
presenting us with material that he says is predictive prophecy, but whom modern scholars
says he was but retelling past history.
Then I challenge all who would think such a thing, whether you are scholar, teacher, pastor or
layperson: why do you keep Daniel, a book of deception, in your Bible? But even more, Christ
Himself upholds Daniel, over and over again, often quoting him and even referring to Daniel by
name in the Book of Matthew. Then for us to accept that Daniel was written not in the 6
th
century B.C. as the writer purports, but rather in the 2
nd
century B.C., and that the supposed
prophecy is not prophecy at all, also destroys Jesus’s personal credibility and makes the NT
Gospels based on nonsense. And that has been the intent all along with these liberal scholars
who have taken over our commentaries, our Bible colleges, and our seminaries. I say in the
strongest possible language that they are wolves in sheep’s clothing and I am appalled that
some of our most respected Christian teachers and leaders have ignorantly accepted such
garbage and regurgitate it to their students and congregations without so much as a thought
about the repercussions of their false statements. This is a result of learning and teaching
manmade doctrines instead of God’s Word.
Daniel 11:20 says that in place of the king of north a new king will appear who will send an
extractor (probably meaning a Tax Collector) throughout the Glorious Kingdom. The
GloriousKingdom is of course the Holy Lands. And historically we find that Antiochus the Great
was replaced by Seleucus Philopator. He sent his Prime Minister Heliodorus to seize the
Temple treasury in Jerusalem, however for some reason he didn’t do it. Legend is that an
apparition appeared to him and warned him not to do it……and he didn’t. Almost immediately
thereafter Seleucus Philopater mysteriously died, and ancient records say that Heliodorus
poisoned him.
At this point we arrive at the time of the infamous king of the north, Antiochus Epiphanies. This
is the fellow that is at the heart of the Book of Maccabees, the one who defiled the Temple and
essentially attempted to kill off biblical Hebrewism. Please note that we have been
encountering a lot of repeating of family names, so don’t think I’m repeating or rearranging
these names in history. Just as families today will reuse names, generation after generation, so
it has always been. And especially when reading the Bible, or when deciphering ancient
documents, it can be difficult to place persons sharing a common name into a proper historical
order.
Let’s re-read another portion of Daniel 11.
RE-READ DANIEL 11:21 – 39
Everything that we have read until verse 21 is connected to the first latter days. It happened in
reference to the years leading up to the appearance of the Messiah, and to His crucifixion.
That is not to say that a king or kings of the south and a king or kings of the north will not
engage in battle once again in the second latter days. However starting in verse 21 we can
definitely see an overlap. That is what is happening occurs in both the first and the second
latter days. Therefore this is where the untangling of prophecies and placing them in their
6 / 9

proper eras starts to get a little more challenging. And by definition, there will be opinion
involved (but hopefully well-founded opinion).
The “despicable man” of verse 21 is Antiochus Epiphanies, but is also very likely
representative of the future Anti-Christ. Antiochus Epiphanies was the Adolph Hitler of his era.
This was not a misguided or manipulated or misunderstood man; he was incorrigible and
wicked. In the mid-1800s the bible commentator Moses Stuart had this to say about Antiochus
Epiphanies that sets the historical tone for this man of infamy.
“ Epiphanies was one of the most extraordinary characters exhibited on the pages of
history. He was both avaricious and prodigal, excessive in his indulgences and prone to
violent passions, a compound of the veriest folly and weakness in some respects, and
of great cunning and dexterity in some others, especially to flattery. At one period of his
reign, there was a prospect of his becoming quite powerful. But reverses came upon
him, and he died at last nearly as his father had done before him, and on the like
occasion. Indeed his extravagances and follies and cruelty were so great, that his
contemporaries gave him the nickname of epimanes (which means madman). But he
gave himself, instead, the title of epiphanies, meaning illustrious.”
We must pay attention to the character and life and choices of Antiochus Epiphanies because
the Anti-Christ will be patterned after them and take them to a heretofore unimaginable level.
Verse 21 introduces this unnamed ruler (who turned out to be Antiochus Epiphanies and later
on will be the Anti-Christ), with the title of “despised” or “despicable” man. He didn’t have
regal dignity and in fact was a usurper. The throne rightly belonged to Demetrius Soter, the son
of Seleucus Philopator.
Verse 22 says that large armies of this king (Epiphanies) will achieve great victories even over
the prince of the covenant. The main issue with this verse is the identification of this “prince of
the covenant”. There have been a number of educated guesses, including Ptolemy Philometer
of Egypt, the Jewish High Priest Onias III, and a few more. Some have ascribed at least some
of this meaning to the time of the appearance of the Anti-Christ. But then who is the prince of
the covenant that is broken and swept away by the Anti-Christ? One could rightly call Yeshua
the prince of the covenant, but it is hard to see how this relates to Antiochus Epiphanies. If we
transfer this from the 1
st
latter days to the 2
nd
latter days and Christ’s return it still doesn’t fit.
Therefore my opinion is that this is referring to someone during Epiphanies’ reign with which
he made a treaty (a covenant), but the covenant was broken. I don’t know who that was.
Verse 23 seems to continue speaking about this prince of the covenant, but with whom this
king (Epiphanies) was deceitful. History shows that Epiphanies (the king of the north)
pretended to have a friendly intent towards Egypt (the king of the south) so that he could win
their hearts. It may be that an actual treaty occurred between Epiphanies and the king of
Egypt. Personally I see no reference here to the future Anti-Christ. But then in verse 24 we
hear echoes of warning that we hear repeated in churches the world over; echoes taken from
the Book of Ezekiel about something that will happen in the 2
nd
latter days.
7 / 9

Ezekiel 38:10-11 CJB

10
"Adonai ELOHIM says: 'When that day comes, thoughts will well up in your mind, and
you will devise a sinister scheme.

11
You will say, "I am going to invade this land of unwalled villages; I will take by
surprise these people who are at peace, living securely, all in places without walls, bars
or gates.
When men think that all is safe and secure, Epiphanies will come and do things that even his
ancestors didn’t think to do, as ruthless as many of them were. This directly refers to Israel but
might extend to most of the planet in the days of Anti-Christ. He will plan how to take spoils
from some, and give it to those who will uphold him. Wealth redistribution. A kind of Robin
Hood plan. But of course, politicians throughout the ages have tried this, but they don’t do it to
do good for the poor, they do it to disguise their true intents, and to only fool and appease the
poor. It was to attain the acclaim of the deceived masses so that they can increase their power,
in the name of social welfare. Along with this the elite who support this leader reap the real
benefits. Most of what is taken from others is given to the leader’s friends and cronies. There
is nothing new under the sun.
And as the prophecy states, all while this slight of hand is going on, behind the scenes plans
are being devised to attack the institutions (fortresses) of national sovereign power. In the case
of Antiochus Epiphanies, he took from some, gave to others, and curried enough favor until he
was able to get the necessary support to go after the king of the south. Epiphanies was plotting
against Egypt all the time he was assuring them of his friendship and allegiance. Therefore in
verse 25 we hear of his attack against the king of the south. Egypt will put together a big army
and offer stiff resistance to the king of the north, but because of the inroads the king of the
north had made into the wallets of the leaders of the south, many of their leaders had been co-
opted into treason and were secretly on the northern king’s side. This is referring to the first
major overt campaign of Epiphanies against Egypt. The king of Egypt, probably Ptolemy
Physcon at this time, couldn’t stand against the northern forces because so much treachery
had occurred over the years among those of his own citizens who had only pretended to be
supporters.
Verse 27 says that both kings’ hearts were evil. In other words, there was no good guy in this
intrigue. Both of these kings, of the north and south, were playing a dangerous game of liar’s
poker with each other; deceiving one another, and trying to one-up the other. Posturing to gain
advantage. Can you not picture our leaders today meeting with Assad of Syria, or the current
leader of Iran, or the Russian President, and telling each other things that neither of them
believes? And now in our time, sadly, the leaders of the United States and Europe are meeting
with the leaders of Israel doing the same thing. Telling lies to each other and pretending true
friendship. And of course, this will go on with the future Anti-Christ as he plays the highest
stakes game in the history of the world; a game that he knows is not so much between him and
8 / 9

the world as between him and God for the supremacy of our planet.
Let’s stop here and we’ll continue in chapter 11 next time.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
9 / 9