THE CONTEMPTIBLE KING

The war between “North” and “South” culminates in the rise of the “contemptible” ruler and the “abomination that desolates” - Daniel 11:1-45.

Daniel received his final vision in the “third year of Cyrus,” and it expanded on the earlier vision of the “Ram and the Goat.” Beginning with the division of the Greek kingdom, the angel traced the coming conflicts between two of the subsequent realms that would culminate in the rise of the “contemptible” king.

Chapter 11 of Daniel begins with a recap of the historical developments presented earlier in the interpretation of the vision of the “ram and the goat.” The kings of Persia “stirred up the realm of Greece,” and from the latter, a “mighty king” appeared and “did according to his will.” After his demise, his kingdom was divided “towards the four winds of heaven, but not to his posterity” - (Daniel 8:21-25, 11:1-4).

In the vision of the “ram and the goat,” the former represented the “Medes and Persians,” and the “goat” the kingdom of Greece. The goat’s “great horn” portrayed the first great king of Greece, undoubtedly Alexander the Great.

• (Daniel 8:8) – “And the goat magnified himself exceedingly: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and instead of it there came up four notable horns toward the four winds of heaven.”

After Alexander’s death, “four kingdoms stood up out of the nation, but not with his power.” From one came the “king of fierce countenance” who sought to “destroy the mighty ones and the holy people.” He despoiled the “sanctuary,” stopped the daily burnt offering, and installed the “transgression that desolates” – (Danial 8:1-27).

As great and swift as Alexander’s conquests were, his empire did not long survive his death. When it was divided, the four subsequent realms were “lesser kingdoms,” and not one was ruled by his any of his offspring (“but not to his posterity”).

Alexander died in 323 B.C. when his son was an infant, causing a struggle for succession among his generals. In the end, his empire was divided among four generals, two of whom played significant roles in the history of Judea – Ptolemy I in Egypt (“king of the south”), and Seleucus I in Syria and Mesopotamia - (“king of the north”).

The first half of chapter 11 deals briefly with the conflicts between the “king of the south” and the “king of the north” over several generations, ending with the assassination of Seleucus IV Philopator in 175 B.C., who was the king of the Seleucid empire. Through subterfuge, his younger brother, Antiochus IV, seized the throne – (Daniel 11:5-20).

Antiochus is described as a “contemptible man.” The word is derived from a Hebrew root with the sense “despise, disdain, revile” (bâzâh). Most likely, it refers to his usurpation of the throne, for he was not the legitimate heir (“and they have not given unto him the honor of the kingdom”) – (Daniel 11:21).

Seleucus IV had two legal heirs, his eldest son, Demetrius I, and his younger son who was also named Antiochus. Both were underage. Antiochus IV exploited the situation to seize the throne for himself. This is represented in symbolic language in the vision of the “little horn” before whom “three horns” were removed - Seleucus IV and his two sons (“I considered the horns, and behold, there came up among them a little horn, before whom three of the first horns were plucked up by the roots - Daniel 7:8).

Antiochus waged intermittent wars against the Ptolemaic kingdom. When he was at the point of finally conquering Egypt, a delegation from the Roman senate intervened and ordered him to cease his attack or face the wrath of Rome (“For ships of Kittim will come against him; therefore, he will be grieved and return” – Daniel 11:30).

Next, Antiochus vented his rage at this setback by attacking the city of Jerusalem, which marked the commencement of his suppression of the Jewish religion:

• (Daniel 11:30-31) – “And he will return, and have indignation against the holy covenant, and will do his pleasure…and have regard to them that forsake the holy covenant. And forces will stand on his part, and they will profane the sanctuary, even the fortress, and remove the daily burnt-offering, and they will set up the abomination that makes desolate. ”

Here again, we find references to the profanation of the “sanctuary,” the cessation of the daily burnt offering, and the setting up of the “abomination that desolates,” events predicted in the visions of the “Ram and Goat,” and in the “seventy weeks” prophecy - (Daniel 8:11-13, 9:26-27).

The verbal parallels are detailed and consistent. The same events are in view in all three passages. The “little horn” before whom three horns were removed, the “king of fierce countenance” and the “contemptible man,” are one and the same person, Antiochus IV, the infamous Seleucid king who attempted to suppress the religion of the Jews by profaning the Temple, outlawing its sacrificial rituals, and implementing the “abomination that desolates.”

Most likely, the “abomination that desolates” refers to the altar to Zeus Olympias installed by the orders of Antiochus in the “sanctuary,” and on which, reportedly, “unclean” animals were sacrificed to honor the Syrian deity. Another link to the earlier visions is the reference to the “indignation” and its “determined” end - (Daniel 8:19, 9:27, 11:30, 11:36).

The same historical figure is portrayed in several visions, a pagan ruler who suppressed the Jewish religion. The man known from history who fits these several descriptions is Antiochus IV (reigned 175-164 B.C.).

His concentrated attacks against the Jews occurred between 168 and 164 B.C., a little over three years. This is the period described in Daniel as the “time, times, and part of a time,” the “two-thousand three-hundred evenings-mornings” (i.e., 1,150 days), and the second half of the “seventieth week.” Besides outright persecution, his efforts included attempts to corrupt the Jewish leadership to adopt Hellenistic customs and religious practices (“The Leader who comes corrupts the people”; “And such as do wickedly against the covenant will he corrupt by flatteries”). The attack on the “holy covenant” and the “saints” is described variously in each of the visions - (Daniel 7:21, 8:23-24).

The description of the king who “exalted himself above every god and spoke marvelous things against the God of gods” refers to his profanation of the Temple. “Speaking marvelous things” recalls the description of the “little horn with the mouth speaking great things,” as well as the “king of fierce countenance” who “corrupted marvelously.”

The story in chapter 11 ends with the demise of the “king of the north” told enigmatically and briefly, “And he will plant the tents of his palace between the sea and the glorious holy mountain; yet he will come to his end, and none will help him” – (Daniel 11:45). Previously, the end of this wicked ruler was told in similar terms:

• (Daniel 7:26) – “But the judgment will be set, and they will take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.”
• (Daniel 8:25) – “He will also stand up against the Prince of princes,; but he will be broken without hand.”
• (Daniel 9:27) – “And he will make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he will cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and upon the wing of abominations will come one that makes desolate; and even unto the full end, and that determined, will wrath be poured out upon the desolated one.”

This downfall of Antiochus also echoes the conclusion of Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream of a “great image” that represented four kingdoms (“He will be broken without hand.” “He will come to his end, and none will help him”):

• (Daniel 2:44-45) – “And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it sovereignty be left to another people; but it will break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it will stand forever. Forasmuch as you saw that a stone was cut out of the mountain without hands and that it shattered the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God has made known to the king what will come to pass hereafter.”

In his discourse on the Mount of Olives, Christ’s reference to the “Abomination of Desolation” is derived from the eleventh chapter of Daniel. Likewise, the attempt by Antiochus to “exalt himself against the God of gods,” thereby corrupting the “holy people,” becomes the model for Paul’s “man of lawlessness” and the final “apostasy” that precede the “arrival” of Jesus to gather his elect – (Matthew 24:15, Thessalonians 2:1-10).

The downfall of Antiochus is echoed in Paul’s description of the destruction of the “lawless one” at the “arrival of Jesus” (“he will be broken without hand”):

• (2 Thessalonians 2:8) – “And then will be revealed the lawless one, whom the Lord Jesus will slay with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his arrival.”

The visions from Daniel tell the story of the agelong struggle between the “kingdom of God” and the kingdom of the present fallen age. The actual battles are waged against the “saints” as malevolent political powers attempt to corrupt the people of God to destroy them. Many of the “saints” do succumb to temptation and apostatize, but many others prevail despite persecution. In the end, “judgment will be made” for those overcoming saints who will inherit the kingdom.

The main protagonist who fights for the “saints” is the one “like a son of man,” also called the “prince of princes” and the “prince of the host.” He also is a surrogate for the people of God, for an attack on the “saints” is the same as an attack against the “Son of Man.”

In Daniel, events climax with the appearance of the main antagonist, the malevolent ruler who seeks to “corrupt” the people of God and destroy the religion of Israel, the “little horn,” the “king of fierce countenance,” the “leader” who corrupts the people, and the “contemptible person” (“Such as do wickedly against the covenant will he pervert by flatteries; but the people that know their God shall be strong”).

Thus, the “little horn” that waged “war against the saints” and “set up the abomination that desolates” provides the historical basis for the New Testament teaching on the “abomination of desolation” and the final end-time figure known as the “man of lawlessness,” the “beast,” and the “Antichrist.”

[Published originally at beastrising.org]

[Download PDF copy from MEGA Cloud]

[Wolf photo by Jeroen Bosch on Unsplash]