×

Daniel 7–12 (Part 2)

Daniel 7-12

Richard Belcher discusses the prophetic visions and messages from the latter chapters of the book of Daniel. He delves into the themes of divine sovereignty and eschatological events, providing insights into God’s ultimate control over history and the encouragement it offers to believers.

The following unedited transcript is provided by Beluga AI.

Advertise on TGC


This audio lecture is brought to you by RTS on iTunesu at the virtual campus of Reformed theological Seminary. To listen to other lectures and to access additional resources, please visit us at itunes rts.edu. For additional information on how to take distance education courses for credit towards a fully accredited Master of Arts in religion degree, please visit our website at virtual rts.edu.

There’s a chart coming around. I think it’s a separate word document on your CD, but since I wasn’t sure and I forgot to check, I’m giving you a hard copy of it.

We’re going to talk about this chart in relationship to Daniel 9. But we have just finished, right before break, setting the context of Daniel 9, Jeremiah’s 70-year exile, confession of sin. The exile has not brought the response from God’s people that was expected. So he gets this prophecy of 70 weeks, 70 times seven. Leviticus 26: I will punish you seven more times, an indication that the exile is continuing.

Now, as we look at this prophecy, we come to 9:24, where several things are mentioned related to the 70 weeks and the purpose of the 70 weeks. So 9:24 says, “70 weeks are decreed about your people and your holy city.” Now, six things are mentioned: to finish a transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for iniquity, to bring an everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and profit, and to anoint a most holy place.

24 “Seventy weeks are decreed about your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place. (Daniel 9:24, ESV)

Now, that last phrase is greatly debated, and we’ll maybe at some point talk about the different views of that. To anoint a most holy place. It may be in your notes right here, but here the whole time period is given in 9:24. Then there is a breaking down of this 70-week time period, and you will have seven sevens, 62 sevens, and one seven. That’s how this 70-week or 70 seven’s time period is broken out in the text. These periods are mentioned in the text, I think in your notes. I’ve given you the Hebrew of 9:25. There’s a Hebrew accent that makes all the difference in the world of your interpretation of 9:25.

That Hebrew accent, for those of you who know Hebrew, is an ethnic pause that occurs after seven sevens. Now, these accents were added to the text. Remember Hebrew, when the text was originally written, all consonants, the vowels, the vowel pointing, and the accents were added 600, 700 ad. If you emphasize the accent, you come up with one way of reading the text. If you don’t emphasize the accent, you come up with another way of reading the text. So this is one place where the hebrew accent really can make a difference.

And you have to sort of weigh how much emphasis do you really want to give to this Hebrew accent, which was added by the Masoretic scribes later? Now, we don’t consider the vowel points or the accents to be a part of the inspired text. It’s the consonants, but we take them very seriously. So that’s part of the issue. Now, if you emphasize the accent, you come up with a translation as you have in the RSV, and I’ve given that to you in your notes, I believe.

And notice how the RSV reads from the time that the word went out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem. This is the RSV of 9:25: From the time that the word went out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem, until the time of an anointed prince, there shall be seven weeks. And there’s a semicolon there, and for 62 weeks it shall be built again with streets and moat. But in a troubled time in the RSV reading, you have seven weeks and you come to an anointed prince. Then you have 62 weeks, which describes the rebuilding of Jerusalem.

25 Know therefore and understand that from the going out of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time. (Daniel 9:25, ESV)

That translation is giving weight to this Hebrew accent. Seven weeks, Hebrew accent, major disjunctive pause. Anointed prince, and then 62 weeks. If you don’t give weight to this Hebrew accent, you come up with a translation much like the NIV. And I have the NIV translation there: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the anointed one, the ruler, comes, there will be seven sevens and 62 sevens. So you see, in the NIV, which doesn’t give weight to this accent, the anointed prince arises after the seven sevens and the 62 sevens.

So you see the difference whether you give weight to that accent or not. Now, in terms of interpretation, if you follow the RSV and you give weight to the hebrew accent, you come up with a non messianic understanding of the 70 weeks. Non messianic. We’ll go through several of those in a minute. If you follow the NIV and others, with the anointed prince coming after the seven weeks and the 62 weeks, then you come up with a messianic anointing understanding of Daniel nine. So it’s tremendous significance in terms of your reading of the text.

Now, what I want to do, and we did hand out a chart, which again, I think is a word document on your CD. But since I didn’t remember to check, I did hand out this chart. What I want to do is go through the various views, Daniel 9, and give you the big picture of the various views, and talk about some of the issues so that you will at least have some idea of how this passage is approached.

I want to start with the non-messianic interpretations of the 70 weeks, give you several examples of the non-messianic interpretation, and then we’ll look at several messianic interpretations of the 70 weeks. The first view on your chart argues that the prophecy of Daniel’s 70 weeks culminates in Antiochus IV. Now, we’ve seen some commentators see everything in Daniel culminating in 168-165 BC. Antiochus IV, no different with the 70 weeks of Daniel.

And what I’ve done on your chart is I’ve broken up the 70 weeks into 7, 62, and one seven, which is the way the text breaks up the 70 weeks. And I’ve given you an idea of how each of these views would sort of handle this. In the first view on your chart, the seven sevens would go from the destruction of Jerusalem, 586, down to Cyrus. The 62 sevens would go from Cyrus to Onias III. We talked about him briefly. He was the last legitimate high priest deposed in 171.

And if you take this view, Onias III is the one that is the anointed one in 926. And then the last seven would focus on Antiochus IV and the events surrounding 168 to 165, which we talked about before the break. Jim, would you mind just closing that door there? Golden Gay, in his commentary on Daniel in the Word Biblical Commentary series, takes this view but doesn’t want to get pinned down on specifics.

The problem with seeing the 70 weeks culminating in Antiochus IV is that Antiochus does not destroy the temple or the city, as 9:26 mentions. So that’s a problem with that first view. Another non-messianic understanding of the 70 weeks is that the 70 weeks brings us down to the Antichrist, not Antiochus IV, but that it brings us down to the Antichrist. There are two different ways of understanding this. We’ll start with view number two on your chart, the seven sevens.

This is the seven sevens is symbolic, and it refers from the going forth of the word to restore and rebuild Jerusalem, which is Jeremiah 29 to Cyrus. So from Jeremiah 29 to Cyrus, that’s the seven sevens. The 62 sevens go from Cyrus and the rebuilding of Jerusalem down to the Antichrist, who is also called the anointed. So the anointed one that’s mentioned in this text, this view would say, is the Antichrist. And the argument is, if Cyrus, a pagan king, can be called anointed, which he is in Isaiah, why not the Antichrist being called anointed?

And then the last seven, in this particular view, would deal with the events surrounding the Antichrist at the end. Now, this particular view is argued by McComiskey. He has an article in the Westminster Theological Journal. Let’s see if I’ve got the bibliography. 1985, volume 40, 719 85. 40, 719 85. So if you want to pursue this more, you can read his article. Now, the third non messianic view, also third view on your chart. And it is the third non messianic view.

It leads also down to the Antichrist, but it has a little bit different way of looking at the breakdown of the sevens. This particular view, this third view, is argued by Kylan Dailych and by Leupold. Leupold is a Lutheran scholar, as were Kylan Dalitsch from Germany. Conservative scholars. The first seven, they say, brings you down to Christ, the anointed one. So they take seriously this Hebrew accent, and they say, this seven sevens brings you down to anointed prince, which would be Christ. Then the 62 sevens refers to the building of Jerusalem, the rebuilding of Jerusalem.

But in their view, it’s the spiritual building of the church that is in view, which is going on right now, they would say. And then in the last seven, that is also, in their view, a description of the Antichrist. The church will lose its influence and the messiah will be a dead issue, which is how they understand being cut off. And the Antichrist will be the one who brings this about to anoint the most holy, in this particular view is the anointing of the heavenly Jerusalem at the consummation. See, go back to 9:24.

That phrase, to anoint the most holy. That’s the anointing of the heavenly Jerusalem at the consummation. So those are three non-messianic views of the 70 weeks of Daniel 9. They do not culminate in Christ. They culminate either in Antiochus or they culminate in the Antichrist. And these three views translate Daniel 9:25 in a way where you have seven sevens and then an anointed prince, usually Cyrus, or in the last. The third view we looked at, that would be Christ, with this period then being the spiritual building of the heavenly Temple or the church.

The spiritual temple, and then the Antichrist at the end. Yes, sir. Golden Gate. Yeah. Commentary on Daniel in the Word Biblical Commentary series. Goldengay, McComiskey, the second view. And then Kylan, Dalitsch, and Leopold argue the third view.

All right, we come now to the messianic understanding of the 70 weeks. And when you begin to examine the messianic understanding of the 70 weeks, part of the question is finding the right decree, because 9:25 says, “Know therefore, and understand that from the going out of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed prince.” So, there is a word, a decree that goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem. Now, the non-messianic views tend to associate that decree with Cyrus’s pronouncement that the Jewish people can return to their land.

But others come along and say, well, Cyrus’ pronouncement really dealt more with the temple; it didn’t deal with the building of the city of Jerusalem. So that decree doesn’t really work. So we have to look for a decree that really relates to the rebuilding of Jerusalem. I think in your notes, I’ve given you four options. One is the decree of Cyrus to rebuild the Temple. Another is the decree of Darius, confirming the decree of Cyrus. And those first two decrees are usually counted as not applicable because they deal mainly with the temple.

So the other two decrees we have are the decree of Artaxerxes to Ezra in Ezra 7, and the decree of Artaxerxes to Nehemiah in Nehemiah 2. So it would be a difference between the decree to Ezra, which would be 458 or 457, or the decree to Nehemiah, which would be 445 or 444. So those are the two main options of a decree that’s mentioned specifically related to the rebuilding of the city of Jerusalem. And that’s generally where many of the messianic understandings of the 70 weeks start.

One of these decrees, now, in the dispensational view of the 70 weeks, one of them begins with the 444 decree, the other one begins with the 458 decree. And I’ve got those listed out on your notes. The first view of dispensationalism that I have listed, which would be view four on your chart, I think, begins with the 440 decree of Artaxerxes. And this seven sevens, which is about 49 years, would then bring you down to about 400, enough time for the completion of the rebuilding of Jerusalem. And then you would have 62 sevens.

Or if you put the 62 and the seven together, you have 69 sevens. 69 sevens from 444, 445 would bring you down, they argue, to about 80 32, which is what they identify as the triumphal entry of Christ. Now, several of the issues when you talk about this is you’re going to see that some of the views. When did Christ begin his ministry? AD 26. AD 32. So that’s an issue that sort of comes in here when you’re trying to nail down these dates.

The non messianic views look at these periods as symbolic, so they’re not trying to nail down time periods. Many of the messianic views, not all of them, but many of the messianic views do try to, in some sense, nail down these time periods. And so where they start, where they end is significant. For this to work 444 down to ad 32, you have to redefine a year. And they redefine a year as 360 days, which they call a prophetic year or a lunar year might work. So that would be a discussion in this particular view.

We’ll talk about dispensationalism’s understanding of the last seven in a few minutes. If you look at the other dispensational view, which is view number five on your chart, they begin with the 458 decree of Artaxerxes. And they then take the seven sevens and the 62 sevens; you got 69 sevens. And they say that brings you down to AD 26, which they relate to the public ministry of Jesus. So you’ve got two prominent dispensational views. Depending on where you start, however, the 69 sevens bring you down to Christ.

Now, what is distinctive about the dispensational view, what we’ve talked about now up to this point, is that we’ll see there’s some overlap with non-dispensational views. But what is distinctive about the dispensational view is that this last seven is separated from the other 69 sevens. The 69 sevens bring you down to Christ. But what happens in the ministry of Christ is that the Jewish people reject him. Remember, we defined dispensationalism early in the class where they separate Israel and the church, and they keep Israel and the church completely separate.

So, prophecies related to Israel are not fulfilled in the church. And so, when the Jewish people rejected Christ, that began the church age, and the last seven was not fulfilled. The last seven will appear again at the end of history, the tribulation period. We have the rapture of the church, and in the tribulation period where God will deal with his people again, and there will be a rebuilt temple with sacrifices. Dispensationalism understands Daniel 9:25-27 as referring to this tribulation period that will occur at the end.

So if you want to look at 9:25-27 from the dispensational standpoint, let’s lay this out. 9:25 know, therefore, and understand that from the going out of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. And I’m reading the ESV, and the ESV emphasizes the accent. So if I had another translation, it would read seven sevens and 62 weeks will bring you to anointed prince, but then the rest of it.

25 Know therefore and understand that from the going out of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time. (Daniel 9:25, ESV)

And after the 62 weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing. In dispensational view, 9:25 brings one up to the life of Christ. The 69 weeks brings you up to the life of Christ. 9:26, which I just started reading, refers to events after the 69 weeks, but before the 70th week. Verse 26 refers to the death of the Messiah and the destruction of Jerusalem.

26 And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing. And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed. (Daniel 9:26, ESV)

That verse 9:26 refers to the cutting off of Christ and the destruction of the city of Jerusalem, AD 70. Then 9:27 refers to the 70th week, the last seven, which is still future, and it describes the time of the Antichrist.

27 And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.” (Daniel 9:27, ESV)

And the idea here is that the Antichrist will make a pact with the Jewish people. He will allow them to have the temples built; he will allow them to sacrifice. Halfway through that week, three and a half years, he will bring an end to sacrifice, and there will be great tribulation.

So in the dispensational view, 9:25 through 27 follows in chronological order, with verse 27 referring to the Antichrist and the tribulation week, which is identified with this last seven. That’s what’s distinctive about the dispensational view. This last seven is separated from the other 69 and is still future during the seven-year tribulation period.

Now let’s look at a couple of other messianic views that are not dispensational. And number six I have identified as literal but not dispensational. And this view is as argued by J. Adams.

I mentioned his book earlier, the time of the end, his small book on Daniel. He wants to see the weeks as having a starting point and an ending point. In other words, they’re not just symbolic. So Adams is non dispensational. But he doesn’t view these periods as symbolic. He begins with the decree of Artaxerxes to Ezra, the 458 457 decree. And so the seven sevens brings you down to about 408 with the completion of the rebuilding of the city of Jerusalem.

Then the next 62 sevens brings you to AD 26 in the ministry of Christ, where he is anointed at his baptism. The anointing of a most holy one is one way you could take that phrase in 9:24. And he thinks it refers to the anointing of Christ at his baptism. Then the last seven is not separated from the other 69 sevens. The last seven refers to the ministry of Christ. He’s cut off. He’s put to death in three and a half years.

And then the second three and a half years of that last seven brings you to the stoning of Stephen. And who is there at the stoning of Stephen? Saul. Which opens up then initially the beginning of the taking the gospel to the Gentiles. So Adams wants to see these weeks as literal. They culminate in Christ. And that last seven relates to the work of Christ. And the last seven culminates in the work of Christ and brings you up, in essence, to Paul, who takes the gospel to the Gentiles.

Now let me add a twist to this view. It’s not on your chart. And that’s Robertson’s view. In his Christ of the Prophets, he also takes a chronological view, but chronological, symbolic. He, in essence, and he takes different, he lays it out differently than Adams does. I think he starts in 444. But basically, the 69 sevens bring you to Christ. And Robertson argues, just like Adams does, that the 70th seven, the last seven, deals with the ministry of Christ in his first coming.

However, he then switches to looking at that last three and a half years of that last seven as symbolic, and that it refers to the whole church age. And the reason he argues that is those three and a half years are picked up in the Book of Revelation, 42 months, 1260 days. And they refer to the whole church age. And so he has this twist. There’s a symbolism at the end there because a part of this last seven refers to the whole church age.

But the rest of it, he pretty much lays it out very similarly to Adam’s, although he starts and ends at a different place. So you see there’s some overlap here between the dispensational view and Adam’s view and Robertson’s view, where they want to look at these weeks as literal and chronological, culminating in Christ. The difference between the views is that the dispensational view then separates the last seven whereas Robertson Adams wants to see everything, basically culminating Christ’s ministry in the first century. Finally, the last view is a messianic view, but it’s a symbolic messianic view.

In other words, the last view, which is, I think, number seven on your chart, sees the 70 weeks as culminating in the work of Christ. But these periods are symbolic. Ej young argues this particular view. And so the seven sevens, he starts with Cyrus’ decree, brings you down to Ezra and Nehemiah, and then the 62 sevens from Ezra and Nehemiah to Christ, and then the last seven, the ministry of Christ, and the results of the ministry of Christ, which includes the destruction of the city of Jerusalem.

And so he takes a symbolic view of these numbers. If I had to choose one, definitely would be in the messianic camp and definitely would be in a non-dispensational camp. So I’m limited to Adams, Robertson, or young’s view, and I kind of like the way Adams lays it out. So if I had to characterize myself, it would be view number six on your chart.

Now, if you take the view that the 70 weeks culminates in the ministry of Christ and its results, then you’ve got to look at 9:25-26 differently, 26 through 27 differently. It’s actually nine. Yeah, starting in 26, but it’s 26 through 27. Those are the key verses. Remember, the dispensational view of 9:26 and 9:27, which looks at the last seven as referring to the Antichrist in the future, takes these as chronological. And so verse 27 deals with the Antichrist. The non-dispensational understanding of these verses sees 9:26 and 9:27 as being parallel to each other, not chronological, but parallel to each other. So 9:26a is the cutting off of the Messiah.

So, 9:26a, after the 62 weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing; that refers to the death of Christ. Then, 926b refers to AD 70 and the destruction of Jerusalem, where it says, “and the people of the prince who is to come, which they would take as a reference to Titus, shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.” Its end shall come with a flood. So, this is talking about the destruction of the city and the sanctuary which took place in AD 70. Then, 9:27a parallels verse 26a.

27a says he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put in the sacrifice and offering that refers, this view says, to Christ’s ratification and confirmation of the new covenant. This terminology is not to cut a covenant as it is in the Old Testament, which would perhaps refer to a different covenant, but it is to fulfill and confirm, to make strong a covenant.

So the argument is that this refers to the ministry of Christ, who at the middle of the week puts an end to sacrifice and offering through his death, through his being cut off. This verse mentions the cutting off. This verse mentions the putting an end to sacrifice and offering, which came about because of the death of Christ.

And then 9:27b would parallel 9:26b, which would be paralleled in 9:27b, where it says, on the wing of abomination shall come one who makes desolate until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.

27 And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.” (Daniel 9:27, ESV)

And the view here is that this also would refer to AD 70. So the dispensational view, which separates the last seven, reads 9:26 through 9:27 in chronological order. All the other views that culminate the 70 weeks in the ministry of Christ and the effects of that ministry read 9:26 and 9:27 in a parallel way, referring to Christ and then referring to AD 70. So, are you confused? Those are the major views and the major issues in Daniel chapter nine. Do you have comments or questions? Clear as mud, right?

Well, you need to generally know the issues, and, yeah, I would. This chart could be very handy. If there is a question on Daniel 9 on the exam, you certainly ought to know the major things that we have commented on related to the various views. And you all know the distinctives of dispensationalism in terms of the 70th week. And the differences here are also significant. Yes, the last seven, especially the three and a half, he takes as symbolic. Basically, he does it because he connects that last three, three and a half years with phraseology.

In the Book of Revelation, 42 months, 1260 days, which in the book of Revelation, he argues doesn’t refer to the tribulation period, but refers to the whole church age. And so he thinks that gives him the basis for seeing a part of that last seven to refer to the whole church age. Others, like Adams, would say that the last seven culminates in Christ. And then you have sort of the results of that in AD 70. But others want to see the last seven in some way, maybe encompassing the church age. Yes, sir. Yes.

First one is to Ezra. When Ezra returned to the city of Jerusalem to try to reconstitute the community and help rebuild the city. And the 444 one is to Nehemiah, where he goes back to rebuild the walls of the city. That’s specifically what Nehemiah does when he gets back to Jerusalem: the rebuilding of the walls. What good is a city if it’s unprotected? And so, both of those decrees relate to the city of Jerusalem.

And the idea is that either one of those decrees could be the decree that is mentioned in chapter 9:25, because they both focus on the city of Jerusalem, whereas the Cyrus decree mentions the temple, doesn’t mention the city. And so the idea is that the Cyrus decree doesn’t really fit specifically. Yes, sir. No, I don’t. That’s a good question. Unless I wrote it down here, I’m not all up to speed on all the ins and outs of. Let me see if I wrote anybody down here. Let’s see. I have the decree of Artaxerxes.

Walvert. That would be the 444. I’m sorry? The 444. 445, which would be number four on your chart. I have walvin in parentheses. So I’m assuming that he might. But don’t check it out. And the other one, I don’t see that I have someone written down here. Feinberg perhaps, but I’m not sure, because Feinberg I have mentioned under the 926 and 27. So I’m not sure that Walvord and Feinberg are two that have written. Walvord’s commentary on Daniel is really a good commentary, full of historical stuff that’s good.

And the dispensational stuff does not overwhelm his commentary. So it is a fairly beneficial commentary to read if you want to get the dispensational viewpoint. His commentary on Daniel is worth reading, and then Feinberg is another one who’s done some writing in this area. But I’m not totally sure if they specifically argue these two views. But they would be connected to one or the other. Yes, sir. Some of them would tend, and I’m not sure what Calvin does. I don’t. Is Daniel one of the books he did not write? He did write a commentary.

He did not write a commentary. Does he? Well, I’d have to double check in a general statement without getting specific. A lot of times, they have a tendency to spiritualize, even places where I would not want to spiritualize. And so, my sense is, although I don’t have any specifics, they might go toward the Kylan Dalitz loophole view, but I’m not totally sure on that in terms of. I don’t think it will take us too long to get through chapters ten through twelve. So let’s try to do that and then get a start on Haggai.

If we can chapters ten through twelve culminate, in essence, with the Greek kingdom and Antiochus? But there’s something else going on here that we’ll talk about when we get over to that part of it. Chapter ten is basically an introduction to the prophecy that Daniel is going to receive. The topic is war, and you get an intriguing glimpse into the heavenly realities that stand behind human conflict. Somewhat parallel, not as much detail as the book of Revelation.

The Book of Revelation at points pulls back the curtain of the human world and shows you what’s going on in the spiritual realm related to the warfare that’s taking place on the earth. Well, in chapter eleven, you have a little bit of that if you look out at Revelation 10:10-12. But Revelation 10:13, especially where Michael comes to Daniel and says, in verse 13,

13 The prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days, but Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I was left there with the kings of Persia, (Daniel 10:13, ESV)

So this angel sent to Daniel was delayed by the prince of the kingdom of Persia. So there is some sense of spiritual warfare, do you want to call it, going on here in the heavenly realms? That seems to be reflected in what is said here, which in some way would parallel the book of Revelation.

So the topic is war, conflict, and you get a glimpse here in chapter ten, just a glimpse of that conflict taking place behind the scenes in the heavenly realms. We don’t know much detail about it, but you do get a glimpse of it here in verse 14. This angel says to Daniel that he’s come to make you understand what is to happen to your people in the latter days, for the vision is for days yet to come.

14 and came to make you understand what is to happen to your people in the latter days. For the vision is for days yet to come.” (Daniel 10:14, ESV)

Now, we think Daniel was written by Daniel, and this would be here, it says the third year of Cyrus, king of Persia. So that would be about 536. And so this is future to Daniel. And we’ll talk about the end product of the whole vision in just a minute.

So chapter ten is an introduction to the prophecy. Chapter eleven 2 through 12:4 is the prophecy itself. And you have four kings in Persia mentioned in chapter eleven, verses 2 through 3, with the fourth being greater than the others.

Now you can read the commentators; many of them will identify four kings in Persia that this is probably referring to. Not always sure which the fourth king is that is greater than the others. But then a mighty king arises who will do as he pleases. Daniel 11:3, which many take to be Alexander the Great.

3 Then a mighty king shall arise, who shall rule with great dominion and do as he wills. (Daniel 11:3, ESV)

Then Daniel 11:4, the empire is broken up and parceled out, and we’ve already seen Alexander’s kingdom was divided into four kingdoms. The four winds of heaven, Daniel 11:4. We talked about these four kings of Alexander the Great.

We talked about that previously, earlier today, and in 11:5-9, it talks about the fact that the south is stronger than the north. But then eventually, it’s that northern kingdom, that Seleucid kingdom, that becomes prominent where the north will prevail over the south, leading to this contemptible person who we have identified as Antiochus Epiphanes. Now, everyone agrees that chapter eleven up to verse 35 is a detailed description of the history of this period.

And you can read Longman’s commentary on chapter eleven to see how close the history in chapter eleven that is given matches the history of this period that we’re talking about. And it’s amazing, in fact, critical scholars, it’s so close that it has to be after the event. It can’t be written by Daniel because it’s so close to the history. But, you know, we believe in predictive prophecy. And we talked about this in Isaiah 40.

But everybody’s in agreement that most of chapter eleven up through verse 35 is a very detailed description of the history of this period. The problem, or the question comes in verses 36 through 45. Everyone’s pretty much agreed that when you get up to verse 35, you’ve come to Antiochus, Epiphanes, and the Greek kingdom. But then the question is, what is going on in verses 36 through 45? Are they still describing Antiochus, or are they describing someone else? Both E.J. young and Walvoord, dispensational, non-dispensational, agreeing. So take that into consideration.

Both agree that with verses 36 through 45, we move into a description of the Antichrist. The reasons for that is that we have the language of the time of the end, talks about the time of the end, 11:40, the time of the end. And then in chapter twelve, this vision ends with the resurrection. Talking specifically about a resurrection up to 11:35, we’ve already said this prophecy is minutely fulfilled dealing with the Persian and the Greek empires. With 11:36, there is no longer this close relationship to the history of the period.

So up through 11:35, you can see a very close connection between the events that are described and the history of the Period of the Persian and the Greeks. When you get to 11:36 to 45, that is evident that you’re no longer describing that greek period with Antiochus. Now you’re still using the SaMe Terminology. you’re using kings of the north, king of the south. So the terminology has not changed, but it’s very clear you’re no longer describing events as they occurred in that Greek period related to Antiochus. Epiphanes.

11:36 through 45 don’t work when applied to Antiochus. And some things that are said in this passage would not apply to Antiochus. He did not extend his power over many countries. His death is not as described in verse 45. And there’s some other things there that don’t really fit the reign of Antiochus. And so both young and Walvert argue that we have moved into a description of the very end and the Antichrist modeled on what is said about Antiochus Epiphanes.

And we talked about Antiochus Epiphanes earlier and what he tried to do to the Jewish people from 168 to 165. The problem is there’s not a clear transition. And you’re using the same terminology that you used earlier in the chapter, but you seem to fade, if you will, into a description of the events of the end. And Antiochus Epiphanes becomes a prototype or a type of the one described in verses 36 through 45, who would be the Antichrist. So when you have EJ young and Walford both agreeing, that’s fairly significant.

And they agree on a lot of other stuff, historical stuff, but that’s a lot of conservatives understand that to be taking place. Now, when you come to chapter twelve and the end of the Book of Daniel, 12:5-13, we return to the scene described earlier in chapter ten.

And you have a question in 12:6. Verse five,

5 Then I, Daniel, looked, and behold, two others stood, one on this bank of the stream and one on that bank of the stream. 6 And someone said to the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the stream, “How long shall it be till the end of these wonders?” (Daniel 12:5-6, ESV)

So Daniel overhears this question. “How long will it be till the end of these wonders?” And he’s given some mysterious numbers here at the end of his prophecy.

Verse seven,

7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the stream; he raised his right hand and his left hand toward heaven and swore by him who lives forever that it would be for a time, times, and half a time, and that when the shattering of the power of the holy people comes to an end all these things would be finished. (Daniel 12:7, ESV)

I heard, but I did not understand. And so we join Daniel with. We hear, but, well, we can say a few things more about this maybe than what Daniel? But verse ten,

10 Many shall purify themselves and make themselves white and be refined, but the wicked shall act wickedly. And none of the wicked shall understand, but those who are wise shall understand. (Daniel 12:10, ESV)

So the wise eventually will understand. Verse eleven.

11 And from the time that the regular burnt offering is taken away and the abomination that makes desolate is set up, there shall be 1,290 days. 12 Blessed is he who waits and arrives at the 1,335 days. 13 But go your way till the end. And you shall rest and shall stand in your allotted place at the end of the days.” (Daniel 12:11-13, ESV)

So you’ve got these sort of mysterious periods referred to as a time, times, and half a time earlier.

25 He shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and shall think to change the times and the law; and they shall be given into his hand for a time, times, and half a time. (Daniel 7:25, ESV)

In the book of Daniel 7:25, this phrase is used in reference to the period that the saints experience extreme persecution. And even Daniel 7:25 could be the period the saints are handed over to the Antichrist. But it’s a period of extreme persecution. The other numbers, 1290 and 1335, there’s a variety of ways that these numbers are handled. Some take them as symbolic.

And 1335 might refer to the whole period of persecution, bringing you up to the end with the emphasis on perseverance, 1212. Daniel 12:12. And the 1290 might refer to the severest part of the persecution. So if the emphasis is on perseverance, 1290, some would argue, refers to the severest part of the persecution. And 1335 brings you up to the consummation. That’s one way to look at them. That’s more of a symbolic view. Others take a literal view of these numbers. Golden Gay takes a literal view of these numbers and relates them to Antiochus Epiphanes.

Remember, in Golden Gate, everything culminates in Antiochus Epiphanes. And he says 1290 refers to three and a half lunar years. 1335 refers to three and a half solar years. So, you got lunar years versus solar years, and it all relates to that period, 168 to 165. He would culminate these periods of time in 168 to 165. Dispensationalists take these numbers as literal, and the 1290 would be related to the 1260 of the Book of Revelation. The Book of Revelation does use the term 1260, sort of a 3.5 year period.

That period, the last three and a half years of the tribulation period, where the intense persecution comes, where that last seven is separated from the other 69 sevens. And the 1335 would be extra days that would inaugurate the millennium. So they would relate that 1335 to the inauguration of the millennial period after the tribulation and the second coming. You do have the book of Revelation. Picking up on these phrases, a time, times, and one half a time in Revelation 12:4.

It’s a time that the woman representing the people of God is preserved from the fear of the dragon. And in chapter twelve, I do think you can argue that it sort of refers to the whole period of the church age, where the woman is in the wilderness, nourished by God and protected. Both amillennialists and historic premills see this as referring to the whole church age, whereas a dispensationalist, dispensational premills would see this as referring to the latter half of the tribulation period.

And then, you know, whatever you do with the 42 months and 1260 days, very similar way to look at them, either the whole church age or the last period of the tribulation period. But 1290, and I don’t think 1290 is used in the book of Revelation, and 1335 is not. So you have to sort of understand these in the context of Daniel, which refers to intense persecution, bringing you to the end in the consummation.

And then similar ideas are used in the Book of Revelation, maybe not using the same numbers, but other numbers that refer to persecution, protection, bringing you up to the consummation. But when you get to the Book of Revelation, the issues are a little more complex in how you view the Book of Revelation. Is the Book of Revelation describing the tribulation period, that last seven year period, or is the book of Revelation describing the whole church age? And that’s the New Testament question, which we don’t have to get into the details of that.

We’ll let the Hebrews and Revelation class lay those questions before you. Comments or questions on this part of Daniel? Yes, sir. Can you talk a little bit about—I think again, if you talk about a type of a situation that was experienced in 168 to 165, where an idol or a statue of Zeus was set up in the temple, Jesus uses that terminology, and some would relate that to events of AD 70. And then the question is if that is also some type of the end period and the Antichrist.

And there’s a passage in two Thessalonians where I think Paul used the term the man of lawlessness, sets him up in the temple of God. And of course, how you understand that is debated by the various views. One of the best renditions of that passage recently that I’ve read. I’ve mentioned this book, Yale’s book, Temple is in the title of it. It’s a fairly new book, Temple and the Mission of the church, or something like that. That’s not the exact title, but those are in the title.

He has a whole chapter on that passage in 2 Thessalonians, where he argues that the temple there is the church in the context of the New Testament letters, but whether in some way the Antichrist at the end relates to that whole abomination of desolation. So you’ve got these patterns, which is what typology is, these patterns. And this is a negative pattern that you can see in 168 87 and possibly something at the end.

This audio lecture is brought to you by RTS on iTunesU at the virtual campus of Reformed Theological Seminary.

To listen to other lectures and to access additional resources, please visit us at itunes.rts.edu. For additional information on how to take distance education courses for credit towards a fully accredited Master of Arts in Religion degree, please visit our website at virtual.rts.edu. Eduardo.

Involved in Women’s Ministry? Add This to Your Discipleship Tool Kit.

We need one another. Yet we don’t always know how to develop deep relationships to help us grow in the Christian life. Younger believers benefit from the guidance and wisdom of more mature saints as their faith deepens. But too often, potential mentors lack clarity and training on how to engage in discipling those they can influence.

Whether you’re longing to find a spiritual mentor or hoping to serve as a guide for someone else, we have a FREE resource to encourage and equip you. In Growing Together: Taking Mentoring Beyond Small Talk and Prayer Requests, Melissa Kruger, TGC’s vice president of discipleship programming, offers encouraging lessons to guide conversations that promote spiritual growth in both the mentee and mentor.