A PROPHETIC HISTORY OF DANIEL 11 FOR TODAY

Gerard Damsteegt
GC, Andrews University (retired)

ABSTRACT: This study uses the biblical-historicist method of interpreting the prophecy of Daniel 11.
The interpretation of this chapter follows a Christocentric, cross-centered interpretation where the first
part (11:1-29) focuses on the great controversy before the cross, dealing with the literal history of
kingdoms in geographic areas. The second part (11:30-45) focuses on the great controversy during the
Christian era after the cross between spiritual Israel and apostate Christianity where kingdoms and
places take on spiritual and global meanings. When interpreting texts in the context of the time of the
end, these are not explained with its focus on literal Israel with its Middle Eastern background, but in the
light of spiritual Israel with its spiritual and universal perspectives.
_______________________

Introduction

This study uses the biblical historicist method of interpreting the prophecy of Daniel 11. The
structural outline of Daniel 11 is considered to be parallel to the prophecies of Daniel 2, 7 and 8. This has
been the view of historicists for many centuries. While the early prophecies of Daniel represent
symbolically the kingdoms of Babylon, Medo- Persia, Greece and Rome, Daniel 11 presents often literally
the most prominent rulers of these kingdoms. Starting with the kingdom of Persia (11:1-2), Daniel
shows the prophetic history of the Greek kingdom (11:3-15) followed by the extensive Roman Empire
with its pagan (11:16-29) and papal phases (11:30-45) and their constant attacks on God’s people
(10:14). The prophecy concludes with the final demise of Babylon dominated by the papacy.
The interpretation of this chapter follows a Christocentric, cross-centered interpretation where
the first part (11:1-29) is seen as limiting itself to the period before the cross, dealing with the literal
history of kingdoms in geographic areas. The second part (11:30-45) focuses on conditions during the
Christian era after the cross, where kingdoms and places reflect the situation of spiritual Israel that
takes on spiritual and global meanings. This means that when we interpret texts dealing with the time of
the end, we do not interpret them in the context of literal geographic areas and places but in the context
of global and spiritual terms. Extensive use has been made of Uriah Smith’s verse-by-verse commentary
on Daniel 11: 1-35 because of its valuable historical data that has been collected by historicists
throughout the centuries. His commentary on this first section ranks among the best biblical historicist
expositions Seventh-day Adventists have produced.

The Persian Kingdom (Dan 11:1, 2)

The Four Persian Kings Succeeding Cyrus

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:1, 2

“Also I in the first year of Darius the Mede, even I [the angel], stood to confirm and to strengthen
him. And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the
fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against
the realm of Greece (KJV).1

Its Fulfillment

“Behold, three more kings will arise in Persia, and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and
by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Greece”
Daniel 11 is a part of a larger vision that began in the previous chapter in the “third year of
Cyrus, king of Persia” (Daniel 10:1). It is important to keep this in mind in the identification of the three
kings that were to rule Persia.
Uriah Smith commented on these first verses, “The angel, after stating that he stood, in the first
year of Darius, to confirm and strengthen him, turns his attention to the future. Three kings shall yet
stand up in Persia. To stand up means to reign; three kings were to reign in Persia, referring, doubtless,
to the immediate successors of Cyrus. These were, (1) Cambyses, son of Cyrus; (2) Smerdis, an impostor;
(3) Darius Hystaspes.”2

“The fourth shall be far richer than they all; by his strength, through his riches, he shall stir up all
against the realm of Greece.”
Smith added, “The fourth shall be far richer than they all. The fourth king from Cyrus was
Xerxes, more famous for his riches than his generalship, and conspicuous in history for the magnificent
campaign he organized against Grecia, and his utter failure in that enterprise. He was to stir up all
against the realm of Grecia. Never before had there been such a levy of men for warlike purposes; never

1 Unless indicated, all biblical references are from the KJV. This
2 Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation (1897 edition), pp. 247, 248. This edition was the last before his death in 1903.

2
has there been since.
“His army, according to Herodotus, who lived in that age, consisted of five million two hundred
and eighty-three thousand two hundred and twenty men (5,283,220). And not content with stirring up
the East alone, he enlisted the Carthaginians of the West in his service, who took the field with an
additional army of three hundred thousand men, raising his entire force to the almost fabulous number
of over five million and a half. As Xerxes looked over that vast concourse, he is said to have wept at the
thought that in a hundred years from that time not one of all those men would be left alive.”3

The Greek Kingdom (Dan 11:3-15)

Alexander the Great and the Division of His Kingdom

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:3, 4

“And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his
will. And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four
winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom
shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.”

Its Fulfillment

“And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his
will. And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken.”
Smith continued, “The facts stated in these verses plainly point to Alexander, and the division of
his empire. . . . Xerxes was the last Persian king who invaded Grecia; and the prophecy passes over the
nine successors of Xerxes in the Persian empire, and next introduces Alexander the Great. Having
overthrown the Persian empire, Alexander ‘became absolute lord of that empire, in the utmost extent in
which it was ever possessed by any of the Persian kings.’ — Prideaux [The Old and New Testament
Connected, in the History of the Jews, and Neighbouring Nations; from the Declension of the Kingdoms of
Israel and Judah, to the Time of Christ. 2 vols. 15th American ed. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1845 and
1848], Vol. I, p. 477. His dominion was great, including ‘the greater portion of the then known habitable
world;’ and he did according to his will. His will led him, B. C. 323, into a drunken debauch, as the result
of which he died as the fool dieth; and his vainglorious and ambitious projects went into sudden, total,
and everlasting eclipse.”4

3 Ibid., p. 248.
4 Ibid., pp. 248, 249.

3
“And shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to
his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.”
Smith added, “The kingdom was divided, but not for his posterity; it was plucked up for others
besides those. Within a few years after his death, all his posterity had fallen victims to the jealousy and
ambition of his leading generals. Not one of the race of Alexander was left to breathe upon the earth. So
short is the transit from the highest pinnacle of earthly glory to the lowest depths of oblivion and death.
The kingdom was rent into four divisions, and taken possession of by Alexander’s four ablest, or perhaps
most ambitious and unprincipled generals,—Cassander, Lysimachus, Seleucus and Ptolemy.”5
This description parallels the historical events connected with the four heads of the leopard of
Daniel 7 and the rise of the four horns of Daniel 8.

Rise of the Kings of the South and North

Principles of Interpretation About Israel-Centered Prophecy
Focus of the Prophecy Is God’s People

In discovering the meaning of this prophecy, it is important to remember that its focus is the
people of God. This was clearly brought out by the angel who was commissioned to give Daniel
understanding in the conflict between the king of the North and the king of the South. Said he, “Now I am
come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision is for
many days” (Daniel 10:14). The fulfillment of the vision began after Daniel’s time and was to continue till
the end of the world when God’s people will be delivered, and the resurrection takes place (Daniel 12:1-
4).

An Israel-Centered View of Prophecy

Smith explained the Israel-centered view regarding the king of the North and the king of the
South: “The king of the north and the king of the south are many times referred to in the remaining
portion of this chapter. It therefore becomes essential to an understanding of the prophecy clearly to
identify these powers.
“When Alexander’s empire was divided, the different portions lay toward the four winds of
heaven, west, north, east, and south; these divisions of course to be reckoned from the standpoint of
Palestine [Israel], the native land of the prophet. That division of the empire lying west of Palestine
[Israel] would thus constitute the kingdom of the west; that lying north, the kingdom of the north; that

5 Ibid., p. 249.

4
lying east, the kingdom of the east; and that lying south the kingdom of the south.
“The divisions of Alexander’s kingdom with respect to Palestine [after the Battle of Ipsus in 301
B.C.] were situated as follows: Cassander had Greece and the adjacent countries, which lay to the west;
Lysimachus had Thrace, which then included Asia Minor, and the countries lying on the Hellespont and
Bosphorus, which lay to the north of Palestine; Seleucus had Syria and Babylon, which lay principally to
the east; and Ptolemy had Egypt and the neighboring countries, which lay to the south.
“During the wars and revolutions which for long ages succeeded, these geographical boundaries
were frequently changed or obliterated; old ones were wiped out, and new ones instituted.”6
Whatever changes would occur, it is these first divisions of the empire that determine the names
of the powers that occupy these territories. This means that “whatever power at any time should occupy
the territory which at first constituted the kingdom of the north, that power, so long as it occupied that
territory, would be the king of the north; and whatever power should occupy that which at first
constituted the kingdom of the south, that power would so long be the king of the south. We speak of
only these two, because they are the only ones afterward spoken of in the prophecy, and because, in fact,
almost the whole of Alexander’s empire finally resolved itself into these two major divisions.”7
This literal Israel-centered view of prophecy focused on the nation of Israel until that nation
ceased to be God’s special covenant people with the fulfillment of the 70-week prophecy of Daniel 9.
Then God’s covenant people became spiritual Israel that was to be made up of every one who had
accepted Jesus Christ as the Messiah, Lord, and Savior of the world. Consequently the literal-
geographical dimensions of literal Israel in the prophecy took on global universal perspectives centered
around spiritual Israel.

Origin of the North-South Conflict

E. Bevan explained the origin of the North-South conflict as follows, “The victory of the allies at
Ipsus brought a new controversial question into the political field, the Coele-Syrian Question, destined to
be with us through all the subsequent history of Ptolemaic Egypt. In the pact between the allies before
the last fight with Antigonus, Palestine (Coele-Syria) had apparently been assigned to Ptolemy in the
event of victory. But it was natural that the kings who actually bore the brunt at Ipsus should take the
view that the king of Egypt, by failing to make any appearance on the critical theatre of war and by his
precipitate evacuation of Coele-Syria on a false rumour, had forfeited his claim.
“A new arrangement made by the victorious kings between themselves after Ipsus now annexed
Coele-Syria to the Asiatic empire of Seleucus. Ptolemy refused to recognize the new arrangement;

6 Ibid., p. 249.
7 Ibid., p. 250.

5
Seleucus refused to regard the original pact as still binding. Here was matter for a controversy which
would remain open between the house of Ptolemy [king of the South] and the house of Seleucus [king of
the North] for generations to come. As Palestine had been in ancient Pharaonic days a debatable region
between the power ruling in Mesopotamia and the power ruling on the Nile, so it was to be still, when
the place of the old native kings had been taken by two Macedonian houses.” 8

Strength of the King of the South and the King of the North

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:5

“And the king of the south shall be strong, and one of his princes; and he shall be strong above
him, and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion.”

Its Fulfillment

“King of the South shall be strong.”

Uriah Smith commented, “The king of the south, Egypt, shall be strong. Ptolemy [I Soter]
annexed Cyprus, Phoenicia, Caria, Cyrene, and many islands and cities to Egypt. Thus was his kingdom
made strong.”9

“He shall be strong above him.”

Smith remarked, “But another of Alexander’s princes is introduced in the expression, ‘one of his
princes.’ The Septuagint translates the verse thus: ‘And the king of the south shall be strong, and one of
his [Alexander’s] princes shall be strong above him.’
“This must refer to Seleucus [I Nicator], who . . . having annexed Macedon and Thrace to Syria,
thus became possessor of three parts out of four of Alexander’s dominion, and established a more
powerful kingdom than that of Egypt.”10
In 281 B.C., at the end of his life, Seleucus reached the summit of his greatness after he defeated
Lysimachus. Bevan concluded, “So the dream which had been the motive in all the wars of the last forty
years . . . had come true at last! The whole realm of Alexander from Greece to Central Asia and India was
fallen to Seleucus, with the one exception of Egypt.”11
Ptolemy I Soter brought Palestine and the Jews under the rule of the Ptolemies from 320 B.C.

8 Edwyn Bevan, The House of Ptolemy: A History of Egypt under the Ptolemaic Dynasty (Chicago: Argonaut Publishers,

1968), p. 35.
9 Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, p. 250.
10 Ibid.
11 Edwyn Robert Bevan, House of Seleucus, vol. 1, (London: Edward Arnold, 1902), p. 72.

6
onward.

Relations Between Egypt and Syria

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:6

“And in the end of years they shall join themselves together; for the king’s daughter of the south
shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement: but she shall not retain the power of the arm;
neither shall he stand, nor his arm: but she shall be given up, and they that brought her, and he that
begat her, and he that strengthened her in these times.”

Marriage Alliance Between the South and the North

Its Fulfillment

Describing the relations between the kingdoms of the South and North, Smith wrote, “There
were frequent wars between the kings of Egypt and Syria. Especially was this the case with Ptolemy [II]
Philadelphus, the second king of Egypt, and Antiochus [II] Theos, third king of Syria. They at length
agreed to make peace upon condition that Antiochus Theos should put away his former wife, Laodice,
and her two sons, and should marry Berenice, the daughter of Ptolemy Philadelphus. Ptolemy
accordingly brought his daughter to Antiochus, bestowing with her an immense dowry.”12

“She shall not retain the power of the arm.”

Scripture stated, “she shall not retain the power of the arm.” This means that Berenice would
lose her influence on Antiochus Theos. As soon as her father Ptolemy Philadelphus was dead, Antiochus
Theos felt released of the marriage obligations of the peace treaty. He brought his first wife Laodice and
her sons back to his court.

“Neither shall he stand, nor his arm.”

Smith commented, “Then says the prophecy, ‘Neither shall he [Antiochus Theos] stand, nor his
arm,’ or seed. Laodice, being restored to favor and power, feared lest, in the fickleness of his temper,
Antiochus should again disgrace her, and recall Berenice; and conceiving that nothing short of his death
would be an effectual safeguard against such a contingency, she caused him to be poisoned shortly after.
Neither did his seed by Berenice succeed him in the kingdom; for Laodice so managed affairs as to
secure the throne for her eldest son, Seleucus Callinicus.”13

12 Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, pp. 250, 251.

13 Ibid., p. 251.

7
“She shall be given up, and they that brought her, and he that begat her, and he that strengthened
her in these times.”
“Laodice, not content with poisoning her husband, Antiochus, caused Berenice to be murdered.
‘And they that brought her.’ Her Egyptian women and attendants, in endeavoring to defend her, were
many of them slain with her. ‘And he that begat her,’ margin, ‘whom she brought forth;’ that is, her son,
who was murdered at the same time by order of Laodice. ‘And he that strengthened her in these times;’
her husband Antiochus, as Jerome supposes, or those who took her part and defended her.
“But such wickedness could not long remain unpunished, as the prophecy further predicts, and
further history proves.” 14 These murders by Laodice were the catalyst for the next war. 15

Egypt’s War of Revenge on Syria

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:7-9

“But out of a branch of her roots shall one stand up in his estate, which shall come with an army,
and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north, and shall deal against them, and shall prevail:
And shall also carry captives into Egypt their gods, with their princes, and with their precious vessels of
silver and of gold; and he shall continue more years than the king of the north. So the king of the south
shall come into his kingdom, and shall return into his own land.”

Its Fulfillment

“Out of a branch of her roots shall one stand up in his estate, which shall come with an army, and
shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north, and shall deal against them, and shall
prevail.”
Smith explained the fulfillment of the prophecy: “This branch out of the same root with Berenice
was her brother, Ptolemy [III] Euergetes. He had no sooner succeeded his father, Ptolemy II
Philadelphus, in the kingdom of Egypt, than, burning to avenge the death of his sister, Berenice, he raised
an immense army, and invaded the territory of the king of the north, that is, of Seleucus [II] Callinicus,
who, with his mother, Laodice, reigned in Syria. And he prevailed against them, even to the conquering
of Syria, Cilicia, the upper parts beyond the Euphrates, and almost all Asia.”16

14 Ibid.
15 Cf. S. Krauss, “Ptolemy II,” in Jewish Encyclopedia, 12 vols, ed. Isodore Singer (New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1902-
07).
16 Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, pp. 251, 252.

8
“And shall also carry captives into Egypt their gods, with their princes, and with their precious
vessels of silver and of gold; and he shall continue more years than the king of the north. So the
king of the south shall come into his kingdom, and shall return into his own land.”
Smith continued, “But hearing that a sedition was raised in Egypt requiring his return home, he
plundered the kingdom of Seleucus, took forty thousand talents of silver and precious vessels, and two
thousand five hundred images of the gods. Among these were the images which Cambyses had formerly
taken from Egypt and carried into Persia. The Egyptians, being wholly given to idolatry, bestowed upon
Ptolemy the title of Euergetes, or the Benefactor, as a compliment for his having thus, after many years,
restored their captive gods.
“This, according to Bishop [Thomas] Newton, is Jerome’s account, extracted from ancient
historians, but there are authors still extant, he says, who confirm several of the same particulars.
“Appian informs us that Laodice having killed Antiochus, and after him both Berenice and her
child, Ptolemy, the son of Philadelphus, to revenge those murders, invaded Syria, slew Laodice, and
proceeded as far as Babylon.
“From Polybius we learn that Ptolemy, surnamed Euergetes, being greatly incensed at the cruel
treatment of his sister, Berenice, marched with an army into Syria, and took the city of Seleucia, which
was kept for some years afterward by garrisons of the kings of Egypt. Thus did he enter into the fortress
of the king of the north.
“Polyaenus affirms that Ptolemy made himself master of all the country from Mount Taurus as
far as to India, without war or battle; but he ascribes it by mistake to the father instead of the son.
“Justin asserts that if Ptolemy had not been recalled into Egypt by a domestic sedition, he would
have possessed the whole kingdom of Seleucus.
“The king of the south thus came into the dominion of the king of the north, and returned to his
own land, as the prophet had foretold. And he also continued more years than the king of the north; for
Seleucus Callinicus died in exile, of a fall from his horse; and Ptolemy Euergetes survived him for four or
five years.”17

Syria’s Counterattack on Egypt

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:10

“But his sons shall be stirred up, and shall assemble a multitude of great forces: and one shall
certainly come, and overflow, and pass through: then shall he return, and be stirred up, even to his
fortress.”

17 Ibid., pp. 252, 253.

9
 Its Fulfillment

“But his sons shall be stirred up, and shall assemble a multitude of great forces.”
Smith explained, “The first part of this verse speaks of sons, in the plural; the last part, of one, in
the singular. The sons of Seleucus [II] Callinicus were Seleucus [III] Ceraunus and Antiochus [III] Magnus
[the Great]. These both entered with zeal upon the work of vindicating and avenging the cause of their
father and their country.
“The elder of these, Seleucus, first took the throne. He assembled a great multitude to recover
his father’s dominions; but being a weak and pusillanimous prince, both in body and estate, destitute of
money, and unable to keep his army in obedience, he was poisoned by two of his generals after an
inglorious reign of two or three years.”18

“And one shall certainly come, and overflow, and pass through.”
“His more capable brother, Antiochus Magnus, was thereupon proclaimed king, who, taking
charge of the army, retook Seleucia and recovered Syria, making himself master of some places by
treaty, and of others by force of arms. A truce followed, wherein both sides treated for peace, yet
prepared for war; after which Antiochus returned and overcame in battle Nicolas, the Egyptian general,
and had thoughts of invading Egypt itself. Here is the ‘one’ who should certainly overflow and pass
through.” 19

Egypt’s War Against Syria

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:11
“And the king of the south shall be moved with choler, and shall come forth and fight with him,
even with the king of the north: and he shall set forth a great multitude; but the multitude shall be given
into his hand.”

Its Fulfillment

“And the king of the south shall be moved with choler, and shall come forth and fight with
him, even with the king of the north.”
Smith wrote, “Ptolemy [IV] Philopater succeeded his father, Euergetes, in the kingdom of Egypt,
being advanced to the crown not long after Antiochus [III] Magnus [the Great] had succeeded his brother
in the government of Syria.

18 Ibid., p. 253.
19 Ibid.

10
 “He was a most luxurious and vicious prince, but was at length aroused at the prospect of an
invasion of Egypt by Antiochus. He was indeed ‘moved with choler’ for the losses he had sustained, and
the danger which threatened him; and he came forth out of Egypt with a numerous army to check the
progress of the Syrian king.” 20

“And he shall set forth a great multitude, but the multitude shall be given into his hand.”
Smith recounted, “The king of the north was also to set forth a great multitude. The army of
Antiochus, according to Polybius amounted on this occasion to sixty-two thousand foot, six thousand
horse, and one hundred and two elephants.
“In the battle, Antiochus was defeated, and his army, according to prophecy, was given into the
hands of the king of the south. Ten thousand foot and three thousand horse were slain, and over four
thousand men were taken prisoners; while of Ptolemy’s army there were slain only seven hundred
horse, and about twice that number of infantry.”21
This battle between Ptolemy IV Philopater and Antiochus III the Great took place near Raphia in
Palestine. The Greek historian Polybius (c.203-c.120 B.C.) gave this account of the size of the great
multitude under command of the king of the North: “The whole number of Antiochus’s force was sixty-
two thousand infantry, six thousand cavalry, and one hundred and two elephants.” 22
In the Battle of Raphia Ptolemy IV inflicted on Antiochus a major defeat. “His loss amounted to
nearly ten thousand infantry and three hundred cavalry killed, and four thousand taken prisoners.”23

Attitudes of the Jews

Great Suffering Among the Jews

Josephus described the suffering of the Jewish nation at that time. “Now it happened that in the
reign of Antiochus the Great, who ruled over all Asia, that the Jews, as well as the inhabitants of Coele-
Syria, suffered greatly, and their land was sorely harassed; for while he was at war with Ptolemy
Philopater, and with his son, who was called Epiphanes it fell out that these nations were equally
sufferers, both when he was beaten and when he beat the others: so that they were very like to a ship in
a storm, which is tossed by the waves on both sides; and just thus were they in their situation in the
middle between Antiochus’s prosperity and its change to adversity.”24

20 Ibid., pp. 253, 254.

21 Ibid., p. 254.
22 Polybius, Histories, book 5, sections 79, 86.
23 Ibid., section 86.
24 Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, book 12, chapter 3, section 3.

11
 Egypt’s Attack on God’s People

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:12

“And when he hath taken away the multitude, his heart shall be lifted up; and he shall cast down
many ten thousands: but he shall not be strengthened by it.”

Its Fulfillment

Smith explained this text: “Ptolemy lacked the prudence to make a good use of his victory. Had
he followed up his success, he would probably have become master of the whole kingdom of Antiochus
[III the Great]; but content with making only a few menaces and a few threats, he made peace that he
might be able to give himself up to the uninterrupted and uncontrolled indulgence of his brutish
passions. Thus, having conquered his enemies, he was overcome by his vices, and, forgetful of the great
name which he might have established, he spent his time in feasting and lewdness.
“His heart was lifted up by his success, but he was far from being strengthened by it; for the
inglorious use he made of it caused his own subjects to rebel against him. But the lifting up of his heart
was more especially manifested in his transactions with the Jews.
“Coming to Jerusalem, he there offered sacrifices, and was very desirous of entering into the
most holy place of the temple, contrary to the law and religion of that place; but being, though with great
difficulty, restrained, he left the place burning with anger against the whole nation of the Jews, and
immediately commenced against them a terrible and relentless persecution.
“In Alexandria, where the Jews had resided since the days of Alexander, and enjoyed the
privileges of the most favored citizens, forty thousand according to Eusebius, sixty thousand according
to Jerome, were slain in this persecution. The rebellion of the Egyptians, and the massacre of the Jews,
certainly were not calculated to strengthen him in his kingdom, but were sufficient rather almost totally
to ruin it.”25

Syria’s Campaign Against Egypt

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:13

“For the king of the north shall return, and shall set forth a multitude greater than the former,
and shall certainly come after certain years with a great army and with much riches.”

25 Smith, Daniel and Revelation, pp. 254, 255. See also H. Prideaux, Old and New Testament Connected, vol. 2, pp. 78-80;

III Maccabees 3-6.

12
 Its Fulfillment

Smith noted, “The events predicted in this verse were to occur ‘after certain years.’ The peace
concluded between Ptolemy [IV] Philopater and Antiochus [III the Great] lasted fourteen years.
Meanwhile Ptolemy died from intemperance and debauchery, and was succeeded by his son, Ptolemy
[V] Epiphanes, a child then four or five years old.
“Antiochus, during the same time, having suppressed rebellion in his kingdom, and reduced and
settled the eastern parts in their obedience, was at leisure for any enterprise when young Epiphanes
came to the throne of Egypt; and thinking this too good an opportunity for enlarging his dominion to be
let slip, he raised an immense army ‘greater than the former’ (for he had collected many forces and
acquired great riches in his eastern expedition), and set out against Egypt, expecting to have an easy
victory over the infant king.” 26

The Rise of the Romans

The next three verses, Daniel 11:14-16, portray a transition in the identity of the king of the
North from the Seleucan kingdom to the Roman kingdom. In verse 14 Rome comes on the scene of
action, becoming a part of the prophetic arena around Israel. In verse 16, the power of Syria is
transferred to Rome after it conquers Syria and makes it a Roman province. From then on, with the
elimination of Syria as the king of the North, the Roman kingdom takes over the role of the king of the
North, as will be explained in the following verses.
Those who follow the Preterist approach to prophetic interpretation fail to see the Romans in
these verses but continue with the history of the Seleucid dynasty. This interpretation forces the
historical events in the reign of Antiochus the Great into the biblical text that is not supported by the
historical details of his reign. This interpretation has even influenced some historicists who see the
Seleucid kingdom extended till verse 19, and the Romans appearing in verse 20 and lasting only till
verse 22. Such exposition is no longer in harmony with the flow of prophetic parallel history of Greece
and Rome that is portrayed in Daniel 2, 7, and 8 where the Roman Empire lasted for about six centuries.
This is very much longer than any of the previous kingdoms. Rome persecuted not only literal Israel but
also spiritual Israel for many centuries.

26 Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, p. 255.

13
 War Against Egypt and Rome’s Interference

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:14

“And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of
thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall.”

Its Fulfillment

“And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south.”
Smith wrote about the attacks of the king of the North and its ally on Egypt: “Antiochus [III the Great]
was not the only one who rose up against the infant Ptolemy [V]. Agathocles, his prime minister, having
possession of the king’s person, and conducting the affairs of the kingdom in his stead, was so dissolute
and proud in the exercise of his power that the provinces which before were subject to Egypt rebelled;
Egypt itself was disturbed by seditions; and the Alexandrians, rising up against Agathocles, caused him,
his sister [Agathoclea], his mother [Oenanthe], and their associates, to be put to death.
“At the same time, Philip [V], king of Macedon, entered into a league with Antiochus to divide the
dominions of Ptolemy between them, each proposing to take the parts which lay nearest and most
convenient to him. Here was a rising up against the king of the south sufficient to fulfill the prophecy,
and the very events, beyond doubt, which the prophecy intended.”27

“The robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves.”

Here Smith and other historicists see the introduction of the Romans. “A new power is now
introduced, — ‘the robbers of thy people;’ literally, says Bishop [Thomas] Newton, ‘the breakers of thy
people.’ Far away on the banks of the Tiber, a kingdom had been nourishing itself with ambitious
projects and dark designs.
“Small and weak at first, it grew with marvelous rapidity in strength and vigor, reaching out
cautiously here and there to try its prowess, and test the vigor of its warlike arm, till, conscious of its
power, it boldly reared its head among the nations of the earth, and seized with invincible hand the helm
of their affairs. Henceforth the name of Rome stands upon the historic page, destined for long ages to
control the affairs of the world, and exert a mighty influence among the nations even to the end of time.
“Rome spoke; and Syria and Macedonia soon found a change coming over the aspect of their
dream. The Romans interfered in behalf of the young king of Egypt, determined that he should be
protected from the ruin devised by Antiochus and Philip. This was B. C. 200, and was one of the first

27 Ibid., pp. 255, 256.

14
important interferences of the Romans in the affairs of Syria and Egypt. Rollin furnishes the following
succinct account of this matter:—
“‘Antiochus [III], king of Syria, and Philip [V], king of Macedonia, during the reign of Ptolemy [IV]
Philopater, had discovered the strongest zeal for the interests of that monarch, and were ready to assist
him on all occasions.
“‘Yet no sooner was he dead, leaving behind him an infant, whom the laws of humanity and
justice enjoined them not to disturb in the possession of his father’s kingdom, than they immediately
joined in a criminal alliance, and excited each other to shake off the lawful heir, and divide his dominions
between them. Philip was to have Caria, Libya, Cyrenaica, and Egypt; and Antiochus, all the rest.
“‘With this view, the latter entered Coele-Syria and Palestine, and in less than two campaigns
made an entire conquest of the two provinces, with all their cities and dependencies.
“‘Their guilt, says Polybius, would not have been quite so glaring, had they, like tyrants,
endeavored to gloss over their crimes with some specious pretense; but, so far from doing this, their
injustice and cruelty were so barefaced, that to them was applied what is generally said of fishes, that
the larger ones, though of the same species, prey on the lesser.
“‘One would be tempted, continues the same author, at seeing the most sacred laws of society so
openly violated, to accuse Providence of being indifferent and insensible to the most horrid crimes; but
it fully justified its conduct by punishing those two kings according to their deserts; and made such an
example of them as ought, in all succeeding ages, to deter others from following their example. For,
while they were meditating to dispossess a weak and helpless infant of his kingdom by piecemeal,
Providence raised up the Romans against them, who entirely subverted the kingdoms of Philip and
Antiochus, and reduced their successors to almost as great calamities as those with which they intended
to crush the infant king.’” —Ancient History, book 18, chap. 50.” 28

“To establish the vision.”

Smith continued, “The Romans being more prominently than any other people the subject of
Daniel’s prophecy, their first interference in the affairs of these kingdoms is here referred to as being the
establishment, or demonstration, of the truth of the vision which predicted the existence of such a
power.”29

“But they shall fall.”

Smith added, “Some refer this to those mentioned in the first part of the verse, who should stand
up against the king of the south; others, to the robbers of Daniel’s people, the Romans. It is true in either

28 Ibid., pp. 256, 257.

29 Ibid., p. 257.

15
case. If those who combined against Ptolemy are referred to, all that need be said is that they did
speedily fall; and if it applies to the Romans, the prophecy simply looked forward to the period of their
overthrow.”30

Syria Attacks Egypt

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:15

“So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities: and
the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither shall there be any strength
to withstand.”

Its Fulfillment

With the presence of an infant king in Egypt, a weak government at that time, Antiochus III the
Great felt that the time was right to recover the losses he sustained during his first campaign against
Egypt. He was quite successful in this second campaign until the Romans pressured him to back off.

Rome Begins to Interfere in Egypt

Smith explained this text as follows: “The tuition of the young king of Egypt [Ptolemy V
Epiphanes] was entrusted by the Roman Senate to M. Emilius Lepidus, who appointed Aristomenes, an
old and experienced minister of that court, his guardian. His first act was to provide against the
threatened invasion of the two confederated kings, Philip [V of Macedon] and Antiochus [III the Great].
“To this end he dispatched Scopas, a famous general of Ætolia, then in the service of the
Egyptians, into his native country to raise reinforcements for the army. Having equipped an army, he
marched into Palestine and Coele-Syria (Antiochus being engaged in a war with Attalus in Lesser Asia),
and reduced all Judea into subjection to the authority of Egypt.”31

“The South shall not withstand”

“Thus affairs were brought into a posture for the fulfillment of the verse before us. For
Antiochus, desisting from his war with Attalus at the dictation of the Romans, took speedy steps for the
recovery of Palestine and Coele-Syria from the hands of the Egyptians. Scopas was sent to oppose him.
Near the sources of the Jordan, the two armies met. Scopas was defeated, pursued to Sidon, and there

30 Ibid.
31 Ibid., pp. 257, 258.

16
closely besieged. Three of the ablest generals of Egypt, with their best forces, were sent to raise the
siege, but without success. At length Scopas meeting, in the gaunt and intangible specter of famine, a foe
with whom he was unable to cope, was forced to surrender on the dishonorable terms of life only;
whereupon he and his ten thousand men were suffered to depart, stripped and naked.”32

Syria Shall “Take the Most Fenced Cities”

“Here was the taking of the most fenced cities by the king of the north; for Sidon was, both in its
situation and its defenses, one of the strongest cities of those times. Here was the failure of the arms of
the south to withstand, and the failure also of the people which the king of the south had chosen;
namely, Scopas and his Ætolian forces.”33

Rome: Pagan and Papal (Dan 11:16-45)

Rome: Pagan (Dan 11:16-29)
Rome Becomes King of the North

Gradually Rome extended its influence into the eastern Mediterranean until it fully dominated
the Seleucid kingdom, incorporating Syria into its Empire. When that was
accomplished, in the prophecy the Roman Empire replaced Syria as the king of the North. From this time
onward, Rome fulfills the role of the king of the North in prophecy. Rome, therefore, can be identified as
the King of the North from Daniel 11:16 onward.
Not every historicist introduces Rome as the king of the North from here on. Some continue
the Seleucid kingdom and introduce pagan Rome from verse 20 till 22. However, this interpretation is
out of harmony with the parallelism in prophetic history between the rule of Greece and Rome. To
assign 15 verses (Dan 11:5 to 19) to Greece and 3 verses (Dan 11:20 to 22) to pagan Rome is way out of
proportion when we compare the short Seleucid persecutions of the Jews with the merciless
persecutions that pagan Rome was involved in for six centuries. Many more of God’s people lost their
lives during the centuries when pagan Rome controlled the world of prophecy than when Greece
ruled. Therefore this interpretation cannot be justified, especially when the prophetic history in this
chapter is focused on bringing out what was to happen to God’s people (Dan 10:14).

Rome Conquers Syria. Macedonia, and Judea

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:16

32 Ibid., p. 258.
33 Ibid.

17
 “But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before
him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed.”

Rome’s Elimination of Syria’s Independence

Its Fulfillment

“He that comes against him shall do according to his own will.”
Instead of a continuation of the Seleucid dynasty, the text presents a new power coming onto the
prophetic scene of action from the north. After the defeat of Egypt by the king of the North, the Seleucid
kingdom, in verse 15, the next text refers to another power that “comes against him,” i.e., against the
Seleucid kingdom. History clearly shows that this new power represents the Romans, who successfully
take on the Seleucid kingdom and gradually limit its power over a period of time until they have fully
eliminated this kingdom. At that point Rome becomes the new king of the North, replacing the Seleucid
dynasty as the king of the North. Notice below the history of Rome’s conquests against Syria, Macedonia,
and the Jewish nation, incorporating them as provinces of the Roman Empire. From this time on, the
king of the North can represent a collective term for rulers of Rome or, according to the context of the
passage, represent individual Roman rulers like influential generals or emperors in prophetic history,
such as Julius Caesar, Caesar Augustus, Tiberius, or Mark Antony.
In 198 B.C. Rome limits Syria’s power in the South. Antiochus III the Great had plans to conquer
Egypt, but Rome prevented him from executing them. In harmony with Egypt’s friendship alliance with
Rome, which dated from 274 B.C., Rome felt obliged to defend its ally. Rome sent ambassadors to
Antiochus warning him not to attack Egypt. Rome also sent Marcus Lepidus to Alexandria to tutor the
young Egyptian king, Ptolemy V, and to direct foreign affairs.
Samuel Sharpe described Rome’s actions against Antiochus in 198 B.C. When the king did not
pay attention to this warning but moved his army toward Egypt, conquering Phoenicia and Coele-Syria,
the Romans sent a second message, now demanding that areas seized be surrendered to them.
In response “Antiochus made peace with Egypt by a treaty, in which he betrothed his daughter
Cleopatra to the young Ptolemy, and added the disputed provinces of Phoenicia and Coele-Syria as a
dower, which were to be given up to Egypt when the king was old enough to be married.”34
In 190 B.C. Rome ends the Syrian power in the West. In 190 B.C. the Romans delivered a
devastating defeat to Antiochus III the Great, forcing him to leave Asia Minor. Bevan described the
Syrian losses: “According to the Roman official account . . . the Seleucid loss was —killed 50,000 infantry
and 3000 horsemen; prisoners 1400 and 15 elephants with their mahouts. Against this the Romans had

34 Samuel Sharpe, The History of Egypt from the Earliest Times till the Conquest by the Arabs A. D. 640, vol. 1, p. 377.

18
lost under 300 infantry, 24 Roman or Italian troopers, and 25 Pergamene troopers killed, and a few
wounded.” 35
In 168 B.C. Rome ends Syria’s power in the South. During the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the
Sixth Syrian war was fought (170-168 B.C.). Egypt was invaded several times, and a large spoil was
carried to Syria. When Antiochus again entered Egypt, a Roman mission met the king and at once put an
end to the Seleucid power in Egypt.
Polybius described this historic encounter, showing the extant of Rome’s superiority at that
time: “When Antiochus had advanced to attack Ptolemy in order to possess himself of Pelusium, he was
met by the Roman commander Gaius Popilius Laenas. Upon the king greeting him from some distance,
and holding out his right hand to him, Popilius answered by holding out the tablets which contained the
decree of the Senate [of Rome], and bade Antiochus read that first: not thinking it right, I suppose, to
give the usual sign of friendship until he knew the mind of the recipient, whether he were to be regarded
as a friend or foe.
“On the king, after reading the dispatch, saying that he desired to consult with his friends on the
situation, Popilius did a thing which was looked upon as exceedingly overbearing and insolent.
Happening to have a vine stick in his hand, he drew a circle round Antiochus with it, and ordered him to
give his answer to the letter before he stepped out of that circumference.
“The king was taken aback by this haughty proceeding. After a brief interval of embarrassed
silence, he replied that he would do whatever the Romans demanded. Then Popilius and his colleagues
shook him by the hand, and one and all greeted him with warmth.
“The contents of the dispatch was an order to put an end to the war with Ptolemy at once. . . .
Thus did the Romans save the kingdom of Ptolemy, when it was all but sinking under its disasters.”36
In 65 B.C. Rome makes Syria a Roman province. Smith described Rome’s conquest of Syria:
“Although Egypt could not stand before Antiochus [III the Great], the king of the north, Antiochus could
not stand before the Romans, who now came against him. No kingdoms were longer able to resist this
rising power. Syria was conquered, and added to the Roman empire, when Pompey, B. C. 65, deprived
Antiochus [XIII] Asiaticus of his possessions, and reduced Syria to a Roman province.”37
It is clear that by 168 B.C. the Roman kingdom dominated the civilized world, having limited the
Seleucid kingdom on the side of the Ptolemaic dynasty in the south as well as on the side of Asia Minor in
the west.

35 E. R. Bevan, House of Seleucus, vol. 2, p. 110, n. 1.

36 Polybius, Histories, book 29, section 27.
37 Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, pp. 258, 259.

19
 Rome’s Elimination of the Greco-Macedonian Monarchy

“None shall stand before him.”

Besides Syria, other kingdoms were not able to resist Rome. One after another kingdom was
conquered and incorporated into the Roman Empire. This was the fate of the remaining kingdoms of
Alexander’s Greek empire, like Macedonia.
In 197 B.C. Rome limits Macedonia’s power. Like the warning given to Antiochus III, the Romans
cautioned Philip V of Macedonia not to attack Egypt. In 197 B.C. in the Battle of Cynocephalae in
Thessaly with the Romans, Philip met a crushing defeat. Rome lost only 700 men while the Macedonians
left as many as 8000 men dead on the field.38
In 168 B.C. Rome takes away the Macedonian independence. On the 22nd of June, 168 B.C., the
Roman general L. Aemilius Paulus decisively defeated the Macedonians in the Battle of Pydna,
concluding a four-year-long war (171-168 B.C.) between the Romans and Perseus, the eldest son of
Philip V. This event ended the existence of the kingdom of Macedonia as an independent state. The
victory gave the Romans opportunity to act strongly in the affairs of Egypt.39
In 146 B.C. Rome makes Macedonia a Roman province. As a result of the victory at Pydna in 148
B.C., the Romans put an end to the Greco-Macedonian monarchy and embarked on an intensive
campaign to destroy the Greek spirit. In 146 B.C., after the conquest of the Achaeans, the Romans
annexed Macedonia and made it a Roman province.

Rome’s Elimination of Jewish Independence

“He shall stand in the Glorious Land.”

Smith described the relationship between Rome and the Jews as follows. First, in 161 B.C., Rome
made an alliance with the Jews. “The same power [Rome] was also to stand in the Holy Land, and
consume it. Rome became connected with the people of God, the Jews, by an alliance, B. C. 161, from
which date it holds a prominent place in the prophetic calendar. It did not, however, acquire jurisdiction
over Judea by actual conquest till B. C. 63; and then in the following manner.”40
Second, Rome settled a dispute regarding the throne of Judea. “On Pompey’s return from his
expedition against Mithridates, king of Pontus, two competitors, Hyrcanus and Aristobulus, were
struggling for the crown of Judea. Their cause came before Pompey, who soon perceived the injustice of
the claims of Aristobulus, but wished to defer decision in the matter till after his long-desired expedition

38 Sharpe, History of Egypt, vol. 1, p. 378

39 See E. Bevan, House of Seleucus, vol. 2, pp. 144, 145.
40 Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, p. 259.

20
into Arabia, promising then to return, and settle their affairs as should seem just and proper.
“Aristobulus, fathoming Pompey’s real sentiments, hastened back to Judea, armed his subjects,
and prepared for a vigorous defense, determined, at all hazards, to keep the crown, which he foresaw
would be adjudicated to another. Pompey closely followed the fugitive.
“As he approached Jerusalem, Aristobulus, beginning to repent of his course, came out to meet
him, and endeavored to accommodate matters by promising entire submission and large sums of
money.
“Pompey, accepting this offer, sent Gabinius, at the head of a detachment of soldiers, to receive
the money. But when that lieutenant-general arrived at Jerusalem, he found the gates shut against him,
and was told from the top of the walls that the city would not stand to the agreement.”41
Third, in 63 B.C. the Romans occupied Jerusalem and made Judea a Roman province. “Pompey,
not to be deceived in this way with impunity, put Aristobulus, whom he had retained with him, in irons,
and immediately marched against Jerusalem with his whole army.
“The partisans of Aristobulus were for defending the place; those of Hyrcanus, for opening the
gates. The latter being in the majority, and prevailing, Pompey was given free entrance into the city.
Whereupon the adherents of Aristobulus retired to the mountain of the temple, as fully determined to
defend that place as Pompey was to reduce it.
“At the end of three months a breach was made in the wall sufficient for an assault, and the place
was carried at the point of the sword.
“In the terrible slaughter that ensued, twelve thousand persons were slain. It was an affecting
sight, observes the historian, to see the priests, engaged at the time in divine service, with calm hand and
steady purpose pursue their accustomed work, apparently unconscious of the wild tumult, though all
around them their friends were given to the slaughter, and though often their own blood mingled with
that of their sacrifices.”42
In 63 B.C., Judea became a Roman province. “Having put an end to the war, Pompey demolished
the walls of Jerusalem, transferred several cities from the jurisdiction of Judea to that of Syria, and
imposed tribute on the Jews. Thus for the first time was Jerusalem placed by conquest in the hands of
that power which was to hold the ‘glorious land’ in its iron grasp till it had utterly consumed it.”43

Rome’s Conquest of Egypt

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:17

41 Ibid.
42 Ibid., pp. 259, 260.
43 Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, p. 260.

21
 “He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom, and upright ones with
him; thus shall he do: and he shall give him the daughter of women, corrupting her: but she shall not
stand on his side, neither be for him.”

Its Fulfillment

Rome’s elimination of Egypt, the last vestige of Alexander’s kingdom, Smith described in this
way: “Bishop [Thomas] Newton furnishes another reading for this verse, which seems more clearly to
express the sense, as follows: ‘He shall also set his face to enter by force the whole kingdom.’ Verse 16
brought us down to the conquest of Syria and Judea by the Romans.
“Rome had previously conquered Macedon and Thrace. Egypt was now all that remained of the
‘whole kingdom’ of Alexander, not brought into subjection to the Roman power, which power now set its
face to enter by force into that country.
“Ptolemy [XI] Auletes died B.C. 51. He left the crown and kingdom of Egypt to his eldest son and
daughter, Ptolemy [XII] and Cleopatra. It was provided in his will that they should marry together, and
reign jointly; and because they were young, they were placed under the guardianship of the Romans.
The Roman people accepted the charge, and appointed Pompey as guardian of the young heirs of Egypt.
“A quarrel having not long after broken out between Pompey and [Julius] Caesar, the famous
Battle of Pharsalia was fought between the two generals. Pompey, being defeated, fled into Egypt. Caesar
immediately followed him thither; but before his arrival, Pompey was basely murdered by Ptolemy [XII],
whose guardian he had been appointed.
“Caesar therefore assumed the appointment which had been given to Pompey, as guardian of
Ptolemy and Cleopatra. He found Egypt in commotion from internal disturbances, Ptolemy and
Cleopatra having become hostile to each other, and she being deprived of her share in the government.
Notwithstanding this, he did not hesitate to land at Alexandria with his small force, 800 horse and 3200
foot, take cognizance of the quarrel, and undertake its settlement.
“The troubles daily increasing, Caesar found his small force insufficient to maintain his position,
and being unable to leave Egypt on account of the north wind which blew at that season, he sent into
Asia, ordering all the troops he had in that quarter to come to his assistance as soon as possible.
“In the most haughty manner he decreed that Ptolemy and Cleopatra should disband their
armies, appear before him for a settlement of their differences, and abide by his decision. Egypt being an
independent kingdom, this haughty decree was considered an affront to its royal dignity, at which the
Egyptians, highly incensed, flew to arms. Caesar replied that he acted by virtue of the will of their father,
Auletes, who had put his children under the guardianship of the senate and people of Rome, the whole
authority of which was now vested in his person as consul; and that, as guardian, he had the right to

22
arbitrate between them.
“The matter was finally brought before him, and advocates appointed to plead the cause of the
respective parties. Cleopatra, aware of the foible of the great Roman conqueror, judged that the beauty
of her presence would be more effectual in securing judgment in her favor than any advocate she could
employ.
“To reach his presence undetected, she had recourse to the following stratagem: Laying herself
at full length in a bundle of clothes, Apollodorus, her Sicilian servant, wrapped it up in a cloth, tied it
with a thong, and raising it upon his Herculean shoulders, sought the apartments of Caesar. Claiming to
have a present for the Roman general, he was admitted through the gate of the citadel, entered into the
presence of Caesar, and deposited the burden at his feet. When Caesar had unbound this animated
bundle, lo! the beautiful Cleopatra stood before him.
“He was far from being displeased with the stratagem, and being of a character described in 2
Pet. 2:14, the first sight of so beautiful a person, says Rollin, had all the effect upon him she had desired.
“Caesar at length decreed that the brother and sister should occupy the throne jointly, according
to the intent of the will. Pothinus, the chief minister of state, having been principally instrumental in
expelling Cleopatra from the throne, feared the result of her restoration. He therefore began to excite
jealousy and hostility against Caesar, by insinuating among the populace that he designed eventually to
give Cleopatra the sole power.
“Open sedition soon followed. Achillas, at the head of 20,000 men, advanced to drive Caesar
from Alexandria. Skillfully disposing his small body of men in the streets and alleys of the city, Caesar
found no difficulty in repelling the attack.
“The Egyptians undertook to destroy his fleet. He retorted by burning theirs. Some of the
burning vessels being driven near the quay, several of the buildings of the city took fire, and the famous
Alexandrian library, containing nearly 400,000 volumes, was destroyed.
“The war growing more threatening, Caesar sent into all the neighboring countries for help. A
large fleet came from Asia Minor to his assistance. Mithridates set out for Egypt with an army raised in
Syria and Cilicia. Antipater the Idumean joined him with 3,000 Jews. The Jews, who held the passes into
Egypt, permitted the army to pass on without interruption. Without this co-operation on their part, the
whole plan must have failed. The arrival of this army decided the contest. A decisive battle was fought
near the Nile, resulting in a complete victory for Caesar. Ptolemy, attempting to escape, was drowned in
the river. Alexandria and all Egypt then submitted to the victor. Rome had now entered into and
absorbed the whole of the original kingdom of Alexander.”44

44 Ibid., pp.260-262.

23
“Upright ones with him.”
“By the ‘upright ones’ of the text are doubtless meant the Jews, who gave him the assistance
already mentioned. Without this, he must have failed; with it, he completely subdued Egypt to his power,
B. C. 47.”45

“and he shall give him the daughter of women, corrupting her.”

Many historicists have seen here a reference to Cleopatra, daughter of Ptolemy XI. As the last
representative of the Ptolemaic dynasty, she attempted to perpetuate her dynasty through a relationship
with Rome. Due to her young age, she was placed under Roman guardianship in 51 B.C. When in Egypt a
few years later, Julius Caesar accepted this guardianship and used this function to make Cleopatra his
mistress. 46 Smith commented on this relationship: “The passion which Caesar had conceived for
Cleopatra, by whom he had one son, is assigned by the historian as the sole reason of his undertaking so
dangerous a campaign as the Egyptian war. This kept him much longer in Egypt than his affairs required,
he spending whole nights in feasting and carousing with the dissolute queen. ‘But,’ said the prophet, ‘she
shall not stand on his side, neither be for him.’ Cleopatra afterward joined herself to Antony, the enemy
of Augustus Caesar, and exerted her whole power against Rome.”47
Those who apply this text to the Seleucid dynasty see it as referring to Antiochus the Great, king
of the North, giving his daughter Cleopatra I to Ptolemy V, king of the South, for political reasons.
However, there is a problem. If verse 17 really signified a political marriage Daniel, would have used
similar language to what he did in describing the political marriage between Berenice, daughter of
Ptolemy II Philadelphus, king of the South, and Antiochus II Theos, king of the North, as predicted in
verse 6. But this is not the case. Here the text uses a unique description of “the daughter of women,
corrupting her, but she shall not stand on his side, neither be for him.” This is exactly what took place in
the relationship between Julius Caesar and Cleopatra of Egypt. To interpret this text as illustrating an
event in the reign of Antiochus the Great distorts history. However, this phrase perfectly describes
events in the history of Rome, involving Julius Caesar and his mistress Cleopatra.

Rome’s Conquest of the Pharnaces

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:18

“After this shall he turn his face unto the isles, and shall take many: but a prince for his own
behalf shall cause the reproach offered by him to cease; without his own reproach he shall cause it to

45 Ibid., pp. 262-264.

46 Cf. Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 4, pp. 869, 870.
47 Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, p. 264.

24
turn upon him.”
Its Fulfillment

“After this shall he turn his face unto the isles, and shall take many.”
Smith wrote, “War with Pharnaces, king of Cimmerian Bosphorus, at length drew him away from
Egypt. ‘On his arrival where the enemy was,’ says Prideaux, ‘he, without giving any respite either to
himself or them, immediately fell on, and gained an absolute victory over them; an account whereof he
wrote to a friend of his in these three words: Veni, vidi, vici; I came, I saw, I conquered.’
“The latter part of this verse is involved in some obscurity, and there is difference of opinion in
regard to its application. Some apply it further back in Caesar’s life, and think they find a fulfilment in his
quarrel with Pompey.
“But preceding and subsequent events clearly defined in the prophecy, compel us to look for the
fulfilment of this part of the prediction between the victory over Pharnaces, and Caesar’s death at Rome,
as brought to view in the following verse.”48

“But a prince for his own behalf shall cause the reproach offered by him to cease; without
his own reproach he shall cause it to turn upon him.”
Marc Swearingen identified “a prince” for Caesar’s “own behalf” as Mark Antony. It was he “who
would protect Caesar’s political interests in Rome while he was away on provincial commands. Serving
as tribune (49 BC), Antony had vetoed several legislative proposals designed to weaken Caesar’s
political ambitions. Because Caesar was not present in Rome personally, Antony would often be the
target of criticisms aimed at Caesar during senatorial debates because of his personal loyalty to the
famous general. In one specific instance, Caesar was issued a senatorial ultimatum to either disband his
troops and return to Rome as a private citizen, or be declared an outlaw of the state. Antony promptly
vetoed this decree, which then led the senate to illegally suspend his tribunal power and take legal
action against him. He would later flee to Caesar and serve under him in the civil war. Thus Antony
would ‘cause’ Caesar’s ‘reproach’ to fall upon himself, similar to the way that Christ would take our
reproaches on Himself (Psalm 69:9, Romans 15:3).”49

Julius Caesar Returns to Rome and is Murdered

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:19

48 Ibid., p. 264.
49 Marc A. Swearingen, Tidings out of the Northeast: A General Historical Survey of Daniel 11 (Coldwater, MI: Remnant
Publications, 2006), p. 121.

25
 “Then he shall turn his face toward the fort of his own land: but he shall stumble and fall, and not
be found.”

Its Fulfillment

“Then he shall turn his face toward the fort of his own land.”
Smith explained, “After this conquest, Caesar defeated the last remaining fragments of Pompey’s
party, Cato and Scipio in Africa and Labienus and Varus in Spain. Returning to Rome, the ‘fort of his own
land,’ he was made perpetual dictator; and such other powers and honors were granted him as rendered
him in fact absolute sovereign of the whole empire.”50

“But he shall stumble and fall, and not be found.”

Smith added, “But the prophet had said that he should stumble and fall. The language implies
that his overthrow would be sudden and unexpected, like a person accidentally stumbling in his walk.
And so this man, who fought and won five hundred battles, taken one thousand cities, and slain one
million one hundred and ninety-two thousand men, fell, not in the din of battle and the hour of strife, but
when he thought his pathway was smooth and strewn with flowers, and when danger was supposed to
be far away; for, taking his seat in the senate chamber upon his throne of gold, to receive at the hands of
that body the title of king, the dagger of treachery suddenly struck him to the heart.
“Cassius, Brutus, and other conspirators rushed upon him, and he fell, pierced with twenty-three
wounds. Thus he suddenly stumbled and fell, and was not found, B. C. 44.”51

Emperor Caesar Augustus

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:20

“Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom: but within few
days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle.”

Its Fulfillment

“Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes.”

Smith continued, “Augustus Caesar succeeded his uncle, Julius, by whom he had been adopted as
his successor. He publicly announced his adoption by his uncle, and took his name, to which he added

50 Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, pp. 264, 265.

51 Ibid., p. 265

26
that of Octavianus. Combining with Mark Antony and Lepidus to avenge the death of Caesar, they formed
what is called the triumvirate [2nd triumvirate] form of government. Having subsequently firmly
established himself in the empire, the senate conferred upon him the title of Augustus, and the other
members of the triumvirate being now dead, he became supreme ruler.
“He was emphatically a raiser of taxes. Luke, in speaking of the events that transpired at the time
when Christ was born, says: ‘And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar
Augustus, that all the world should be enrolled [for taxation].’ Luke 2:1. That taxing which embraced all
the world was an event worthy of notice; and the person who enforced it has certainly a claim to the title
of ‘a raiser of taxes’ above every other competitor.
“The St. Louis Globe Democrat, as quoted in Current Literature for July, 1895, says: ‘Augustus
Caesar was not the public benefactor he is represented. He was the most exacting tax collector the
Roman world had up to that time ever seen.’”52

“In the glory of the kingdom.”

Smith remarked, “And he stood up ‘in the glory of the kingdom.’ Rome reached in his days the
pinnacle of its greatness and power. The ‘Augustan Age’ is an expression everywhere used to denote the
golden age of Roman history. Rome never saw a brighter hour. Peace was promoted, justice maintained,
luxury curbed, discipline established, and learning encouraged.
“In his reign, the temple of Janus was for the third time shut since the foundation of Rome,
signifying that all the world was at peace; and at this auspicious hour our Lord was born in Bethlehem of
Judea. In a little less than eighteen years after the taxing brought to view, seeming but a ‘few days’ to the
distant gaze of the prophet, Augustus died, not in anger nor in battle, but peacefully in his bed, at Nola,
whither he had gone to seek repose and health, A. D. 14, in the seventy-sixth year of his age.”53

Emperor Tiberius Caesar

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:21

“And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the
kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.”

Its Fulfillment

Commenting on this text, Smith stated, “Tiberius Caesar next appeared after Augustus Caesar on

52 Ibid., pp. 265, 266.

53 Ibid., p. 266.

27
the Roman throne. He was raised to the consulate in his twenty-eighth year. It is recorded that as
Augustus was about to nominate his successor, his wife, Livia, besought him to nominate Tiberius (her
son by a former husband); but the emperor said, ‘Your son is too vile to wear the purple of Rome;’ and
the nomination was given to Agrippa, a very virtuous and much-respected Roman citizen.
“But the prophecy had foreseen that a vile person should succeed Augustus. Agrippa died; and
Augustus was again under the necessity of choosing a successor. Livia renewed her intercessions for
Tiberius; and Augustus, weakened by age and sickness, was more easily flattered, and finally consented
to nominate, as his colleague and successor, that ‘vile’ young man. But the citizens never gave him the
love, respect, and ‘honor of the kingdom’ due to an upright and faithful sovereign.
“How clear a fulfilment is this of the prediction that they should not give him the honor of the
kingdom. But he was to come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries. A paragraph from the
Encyclopedia Americana shows how this was fulfilled:—
“‘During the remainder of the life of Augustus, he [Tiberius] behaved with great prudence and
ability, concluding a war with the Germans in such a manner as to merit a triumph. After the defeat of
Varus and his legions, he was sent to check the progress of the victorious Germans, and acted in that war
with equal spirit and prudence. On the death of Augustus, he succeeded, without opposition, to the
sovereignty of the empire: which, however, with his characteristic dissimulation, he affected to decline,
until repeatedly solicited by the servile senate.’
“Dissimulation on his part, flattery on the part of the servile senate, and a possession of the
kingdom without opposition — such were the circumstances attending his accession to the throne, and
such were the circumstances for which the prophecy called.
“The person brought to view in the text is called ‘a vile person.’ Was such the character
sustained by Tiberius? Let another paragraph from the Encyclopedia answer:—
“‘Tacitus records the events of this reign, including the suspicious death of Germanicus, the
detestable administration of Sejanus, the poisoning of Drusus, with all the extraordinary mixture of
tyranny with occasional wisdom and good sense which distinguished the conduct of Tiberius, until his
infamous and dissolute retirement, A. D. 26, to the isle of Capreae, in the bay of Naples, never to return
to Rome.
“‘On the death of Livia, A. D. 29, the only restraint upon his actions and those of the detestable
Sejanus, was removed, and the destruction of the widow and family of Germanicus followed. At length
the infamous favorite extended his views to the empire itself, and Tiberius, informed of his
machinations, prepared to encounter him with his favorite weapon, dissimulation. Although fully
resolved upon his destruction, he accumulated honors upon him, declared him his partner in the
consulate, and, after long playing with his credulity, and that of the senate, who thought him in greater
favor than ever, he artfully prepared for his arrest. Sejanus fell deservedly and unpitied; but many

28
innocent persons shared in his destruction, in consequence of the suspicion and cruelty of Tiberius,
which now exceeded all limits.
“‘The remainder of the reign of this tyrant is little more than a disgusting narrative of servility
on the one hand, and of despotic ferocity on the other. That he himself endured as much misery as he
inflicted, is evident from the following commencement of one of his letters to the senate: “What I shall
write to you, conscript fathers, or what I shall not write, or why I should write at all, may the gods and
goddesses plague me more than I feel daily that they are doing, if I can tell.” “What mental torture,”
observes Tacitus, in reference to this passage, “which could extort such a confession!”’
“‘Seneca remarks of Tiberius that he was never intoxicated but once in his life; for he continued
in a state of perpetual intoxication from the time he gave himself to drinking, to the last moment of his
life.’
“Tyranny, hypocrisy, debauchery, and uninterrupted intoxication— if these traits and practices
show a man to be vile, Tiberius exhibited that character in disgusting perfection.”54

Death of Tiberius and Jesus Christ

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:22

“And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea,
also the prince of the covenant.”

Its Fulfillment

“And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken.”
Smith said, “Bishop Newton presents the following reading as agreeing better with the original:
‘And the arms of the overflower shall be overflown from before him, and shall be broken.’ The
expressions signify revolution and violence; and in fulfilment we should look for the arms of Tiberius,
the overflower, to be overflown, or, in other words, for him to suffer a violent death. To show how this
was accomplished, we again have recourse to the Encyclopedia Americana, art. Tiberius:—
“‘Acting the hypocrite to the last, he disguised his increasing debility as much as he was able,
even affecting to join in the sports and exercises of the soldiers of his guard. At length, leaving his
favorite island, the scene of the most disgusting debaucheries, he stopped at a country house near the
promontory of Micenum, where, on the 16th of March, 37, he sunk into a lethargy, in which he appeared
dead; and Caligula was preparing with a numerous escort to take possession of the empire, when his

54 Ibid., pp. 266-268.

29
sudden revival threw them into consternation.
“At this critical instant, Macro, the pretorian prefect, caused him to be suffocated with pillows.
Thus expired the emperor Tiberius, in the seventy-eighth year of his age, and twenty-third of his reign,
universally execrated.” 55

“The prince of the covenant”

Smith continued, “‘The prince of the covenant’ unquestionably refers to Jesus Christ, ‘the
Messiah the Prince,’ who was to ‘confirm the covenant’ one week with his people. Dan. 9:25-27. The
prophet, having taken us down to the death of Tiberius, now mentions incidentally an event to transpire
in his reign, so important that it should not be passed over; namely, the cutting off of the Prince of the
covenant, or in other words, the death of our Lord Jesus Christ.
“According to the prophecy, this took place in the reign of Tiberius. Luke informs us (3:1-3) that
in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, John the Baptist commenced his ministry. The reign
of Tiberius is to be reckoned, according to Prideaux, Dr. Hales, Lardner, and others, from his elevation to
the throne to reign jointly with Augustus, his step-father, in August, A. D. 12.
“His fifteenth year would therefore be from August, A. D. 26, to August, A. D. 27. Christ was six
months younger than John, and is supposed to have commenced his ministry six months later, both,
according to the law of the priesthood, entering upon their work when they were thirty years of age.
“If John commenced in the spring, in the latter portion of Tiberius’s fifteenth year, it would bring
the commencement of Christ’s ministry in the autumn of A. D. 27; and right here the best authorities
place the baptism of Christ, it being the exact point where the 483 years from B. C. 457, which were to
extend to the Messiah the Prince, terminated; and Christ went forth proclaiming that the time was
fulfilled.
“From this point we go forward three years and a half to find the date of the crucifixion; for
Christ attended but four Passovers, and was crucified at the last one. Three and a half years from the
autumn of A.D. 27 bring us to the spring of A.D. 31. The death of Tiberius is placed but six years later, in
A.D. 37.”56

Rome’s Unique Strategy of Conquest

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:23, 24

“And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall
become strong with a small people. He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province;

55 Ibid., pp. 268, 269.

56 Ibid., pp. 269, 270.

30
and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers' fathers; he shall scatter among
them the prey, and spoil, and riches: yea, and he shall forecast his devices against the strong holds, even
for a time.”

Its Fulfillment

“The league made with him”

Here the prophecy introduces the reader to a turning point in Jewish-Roman relations. From
verse 16 to verse 22, the prophecy has focused on the secular history of the Roman Empire. Now we are
informed about the time when the Jews first made an official league or alliance of mutual assistance with
Rome and about Rome’s unique strategy that led to the loss of independence by God’s people.
In introducing this league of mutual protection between the people of God and pagan Rome,
Smith remarked, “The ‘him’ with whom the league here spoken of is made, must be the same power
which has been the subject of the prophecy from the 14th verse; and that this is the Roman power is
shown beyond controversy in the fulfillment of the prophecy in three individuals, as already noticed,
who successively ruled over the Roman Empire; namely, Julius, Augustus, and Tiberius Caesar. The first,
on returning to the fort of his own land in triumph, stumbled and fell, and was not found. Verse 19. The
second was a raiser of taxes; and he reigned in the glory of the kingdom, and died neither in anger nor in
battle, but peacefully in his own bed. Verse 20. The third was a dissembler, and one of the vilest of
characters. He entered upon the kingdom peaceably, but both his reign and life were ended by violence.
And in his reign the Prince of the covenant, Jesus of Nazareth, was put to death upon the cross. Verses
21. 22. . . .
“Having taken us down through the secular events of the empire to the end of the seventy
weeks, the prophet, in verse 23, takes us back to the time when the Romans became directly connected
with the people of God by the Jewish league, B.C. 161: from which point we are then taken down in a
direct line of events to the final triumph of the church, and the setting up of God's everlasting kingdom.
The Jews, being grievously oppressed by the Syrian kings, sent an embassy to Rome, to solicit the aid of
the Romans, and to join themselves in ‘a league of amity and confederacy with them.’ 1 Mac. 8; Prideaux,
II, 234; Josephus’s Antiquities, book 12, chap. 10, sec. 6. The Romans listened to the request of the Jews,
and granted them a decree, couched in these words:—
“‘The decree of the senate concerning a league of assistance and friendship with the nation of
the Jews. It shall not be lawful for any that are subject to the Romans, to make war with the nation of the
Jews, nor to assist those that do so, either by sending them corn, or ships, or money; and if any attack be
made upon the Jews, the Romans shall assist them as far as they are able; and again, if any attack be
made upon the Romans, the Jews shall assist them. And if the Jews have a mind to add to, or to take from,

31
this league of assistance, that shall be done with the common consent of the Romans. And whatever
addition shall thus be made, it shall be of force.’ ‘This decree,’ says Josephus, ‘was written by Eupolemus,
the son of John, and by Jason, the son of Eleazer, when Judas was high priest of the nation, and Simon, his
brother, was general of the army. And this was the first league that the Romans made with the Jews, and
was managed after this manner.’” 57
Then the text further explains that after the league was made, Rome pursued a deceitful strategy
that led finally to the complete subjection of God’s people.

“Shall become strong with a small people.”

At the time of this league, as Smith explained, “the Romans were a small people, and began to
work deceitfully, or with cunning, as the word signifies. And from this point they rose by a steady and
rapid ascent to the height of power which they afterward attained.”58

“He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province; and he shall do that which
his fathers have not done, nor his fathers' fathers; he shall scatter among them the prey, and
spoil, and riches: yea, and he shall forecast his devices against the strong holds.”
The strategy of Rome to conquer other peoples was different from that of other kingdoms. Smith
described that as follows: “The usual manner in which nations had, before the days of Rome, entered
upon valuable provinces and rich territory, was by war and conquest. Rome was now to do what had not
been done by the fathers or the fathers' fathers; namely, receive these acquisitions through peaceful
means. The custom, before unheard of, was now inaugurated, of kings' leaving by legacy their kingdoms
to the Romans. Rome came into possession of large provinces in this manner. And those who thus came
under the dominion of Rome derived no small advantage therefrom. They were treated with kindness
and leniency. It was like having the prey and spoil distributed among them. They were protected from
their enemies, and rested in peace and safety under the aegis of the Roman power.”59

“Even for a time”

Rome continues this strategy “for a time” during which it has full dominion over the then-known
civilized world of Bible prophecy. Many historicists have interpreted “for a time” as prophetic “time”
which refers to a period of 360 years. The following verses introduce us to the beginning of this
prophetic time period.

57 Ibid., pp. 270, 271.

58 Ibid., p. 271.
59 Ibid., p. 273.

32
 Other Interpretations

Not all historicists interpret the league as the treaty between God’s people and the Romans in
161 B.C. Their presupposition is that Daniel 11 shows a continuous chronological time sequence and
cannot refer to past events. As verse 22 refers to the reign of Tiberius and the death of Christ in A.D. 31,
verse 23, they argue, should go forward in time and not backward to 161 B.C. They interpret the rest of
chapter 11 as referring to papal Rome. Verse 23 refers to Constantine, who was supposed to have made a
league or alliance between paganism and Christianity. Some interpret verses 25 to 28 as pertaining to
the first conflict between papal Rome and the Islamic powers during the Middle East crusades from the
11th till the 13th centuries. The second conflict is in verses 29 to 31 and shows the wars between the
papacy and Islam during the Reformation. The third and final war of the papacy against Islam is
predicted in verses 40 to 45 and is taking place now, according to their view.
However, those who object to backtracking in prophetic time and hold that prophecy only goes
in a continuous chronological sequence should remember that Revelation 13 also backtracks. Revelation
13:1-3 gives a summary of the beast’s exploits, including the healing of the deadly wound. and then in
verses 4 to 10 it backtracks, giving an overview of the beast’s operations during its history prior to the
healing of the wound.
Others who see the crusades in verses 25 to 30 interpret verse 31 as fulfilled during the sixth
century when papal Rome supplanted pagan Rome. This interpretation also backtracks to an earlier
period.
The problem with these interpretations is that there is no clarity about the precise meaning of
the “league” between God’s people and the Romans. Furthermore, the historical facts of the wars
between the papacy and Islam cannot be supported by verses 24 to 30 and have not the slightest backing
in the symbolic prophecies of Daniel 2, 7, and 8. The Islamic interpretation in these verses is forced and
distorts the connection between the biblical texts and history. These Islamic interpretations have been
promoted by evangelical non-historicists for a long time. In contrast to these speculations, the events of
the monumental war between Rome and the Greek Ptolemaic dynasty that provides the start of the
prophetic time period of Rome fit the historical events.

Decisive Battle Between Pagan Rome and the Greek Ptolemaic Dynasty

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:25

"And he shall stir up his power and his courage against the king of the south with a great army; and the
king of the south shall be stirred up to battle with a very great and mighty army; but he shall not stand:
for they shall forecast devices against him."

33
 Its Fulfillment

This verse introduces the final and most severe conflict between the king of the North and the
king of the South that ended the last aspirations of the Greek Ptolemaic dynasty of Egypt as a world
power once and for all. This most significant battle between two mighty armies made pagan Rome, who
was at this time the king of the North, the uncontested world empire for centuries. This war in the
history of Rome was the Battle of Actium in 31 B.C. between Rome and Egypt that made Rome the
undisputed ruler of the then-known world. Many historicists have taken the date of Rome’s decisive
victory over the Greeks as the beginning of the prophetic “time” mentioned in the previous verse.
Smith gave a helpful overview that led to this massive classic battle. “Mark Antony, Augustus
Caesar, and Lepidus constituted the triumvirate which had sworn to avenge the death of Julius Caesar.
This Antony became the brother-in-law of Augustus by marrying his sister, Octavia. Antony was sent
into Egypt on government business, but fell a victim to the arts and charms of Cleopatra, Egypt's
dissolute queen. So strong was the passion he conceived for her, that he finally espoused the Egyptian
interests, rejected his wife, Octavia, to please Cleopatra, bestowed province after province upon the
latter to gratify her avarice, celebrated a triumph at Alexandria instead of Rome, and otherwise so
affronted the Roman people that Augustus had no difficulty in leading them to engage heartily in a war
against this enemy of their country. This war was ostensibly against Egypt and Cleopatra; but it was
really against Antony, who now stood at the head of Egyptian affairs. And the true cause of their
controversy was, says Prideaux, that neither of them could be content with only half of the Roman
empire; for Lepidus having been deposed from the triumvirate, it now lay between them, and each being
determined to possess the whole, they cast the die of war for its possession.
“Antony assembled his fleet at Samos. Five hundred ships of war, of extraordinary size and
structure, having several decks one above another, with towers upon the head and stern, made an
imposing and formidable array. These ships carried two hundred thousand foot, and twelve thousand
horse. The kings of Libya, Cilicia, Cappadocia, Paphlagonia, Comagena, and Thrace, were there in person;
and those of Pontus, Judea, Lycaonia, Galatia, and Media, had sent their troops. A more splendid and
gorgeous military spectacle than this fleet of battle ships, as they spread their sails, and moved out upon
the bosom of the sea, the world has rarely seen. Surpassing all in magnificence came the galley of
Cleopatra, floating like a palace of gold beneath a cloud of purple sails. Its flags and streamers fluttered
in the wind, and trumpets and other instruments of war made the heavens resound with notes of joy and
triumph. Antony followed close after in a galley of almost equal magnificence. And the giddy queen,
intoxicated with the sight of the warlike array, short-sighted and vainglorious, at the head of her
infamous troop of eunuchs, foolishly threatened the Roman capital with approaching ruin.

34
 “Caesar Augustus, on the other hand, displayed less pomp but more utility. He had but half as
many ships as Antony, and only eighty thousand foot. But all his troops were chosen men, and on board
his fleet were none but experienced seamen; whereas Antony, not finding mariners sufficient, had been
obliged to man his vessels with artisans of every class, men inexperienced, and better calculated to cause
trouble than to do real service in time of battle. The season being far consumed in these preparations,
Caesar made his rendezvous at Brundusium, and Antony at Corcyra, till the following year.
“As soon as the season permitted, both armies were put in motion on both land and sea. The
fleets at length entered the Ambracian Gulf in Epirus, and the land forces were drawn up on either shore
in plain view. Antony's most experienced generals advised him not to hazard a battle by sea with his
inexperienced mariners, but send Cleopatra back to Egypt, and hasten at once into Thrace or Macedonia,
and trust the issue to his land forces, who were composed of veteran troops. But he, illustrating the old
adage, Quem Deus vult perdere, prius dementat (whom God wishes to destroy, he first makes mad),
infatuated by Cleopatra, seemed only desirous of pleasing her; and she, trusting to appearances only,
deemed her fleet invincible, and advised immediate action.
“The battle was fought Sept. 2, B.C. 31, at the mouth of the gulf of Ambracia, near the city of
Actium. The world was the stake for which these stern warriors, Antony and Caesar, now played. The
contest, long doubtful, was at length decided by the course which Cleopatra pursued; for she, frightened
at the din of battle, took to flight when there was no danger, and drew after her the whole Egyptian fleet.
Antony, beholding this movement, and lost to everything but his blind passion for her, precipitately
followed, and yielded a victory to Caesar, which, had his Egyptian forces proved true to him, and had he
proved true to his own manhood, he might have gained.
“This battle doubtless marks the commencement of the ‘time’ mentioned in verse 24. And as
during this ‘time’ devices were to be forcast from the stronghold, or Rome, we should conclude that at
the end of that period western supremacy would cease, or such a change take place in the empire that
the city would no longer be considered the seat of government. From B.C. 31, a prophetic time, or 360
years, would bring us to A.D. 330. And it hence becomes a noteworthy fact that the seat of empire was
removed from Rome to Constantinople by Constantine the Great in that very year. (See Encyclopedia
Americana, art. Constantinople.)”60

The Cause of the Defeat of the King of the South

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:26

60 Ibid., pp. 273-276.

35
 “Yea, they that feed of the portion of his meat shall destroy him, and his army shall overflow; and
many shall fall down slain.”

Its Fulfillment

“Yea, they that feed of the portion of his meat shall destroy him.
This text reveals the events after the defeat of Mark Antony. Smith commented, “The cause of
Antony’s overthrow was the desertion of his allies and friends, those that fed of the portion of his meat.
First, Cleopatra, as already described, suddenly withdrew from the battle, taking sixty ships of the line
with her. Secondly, the land army, disgusted with the infatuation of Antony, went over to Caesar, who
received them with open arms. Thirdly, when Antony arrived at Libya, he found that the forces which he
had there left under Scarpus to guard the frontier, had declared for Caesar. Fourthly, being followed by
Caesar into Egypt, he was betrayed by Cleopatra, and his forces surrendered to Caesar. Hereupon, in
rage and despair, he took his own life.”61

The Politics of the King of the North and King of the South

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:27

“And both these kings’ hearts shall be to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table; but it shall
not prosper: for yet the end shall be at the time appointed.”

Its Fulfillment

This verse provides some final comments about the character of the king of the South and the
king of the North before their final battle of Actium described in verse 25. Smith wrote, “Antony and
Caesar were formerly in alliance. Yet under the garb of friendship they were both aspiring and intriguing
for universal dominion. Their protestations of deference to, and friendship for, each other, were the
utterances of hypocrites. They spoke lies at one table. Octavia, the wife of Antony and sister of Caesar,
declared to the people of Rome at the time Antony divorced her, that she had consented to marry him
solely with the hope that it would prove a pledge of union between Caesar and Antony. But that counsel
did not prosper. The rupture came; and in the conflict that ensued, Caesar came off entirely
victorious.”62

61 Ibid., p. 276.
62 Ibid.

36
 The Exploits of the King of the North

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:28

“Then shall he return into his land with great riches; and his heart shall be against the holy covenant;
and he shall do exploits, and return to his own land.”

Its Fulfillment

After the elimination of the king of the South, the verse focuses attention on the exploits of the
king of the North and his two triumphal returns to Rome from successful conquests. These Smith
described as follows: “Two returnings from foreign conquest are here brought to view; the first, after the
events narrated in verses 26, 27; and the second, after this power had had indignation against the holy
covenant, and had performed exploits.”63
Rome’s conquest of Egypt. “The first was fulfilled in the return of Caesar after his expedition
against Egypt and Antony. He returned to Rome with abundant honor and riches; for, says Prideaux (II,
556), ‘At this time such vast riches were brought to Rome from Egypt on the reducing of that country,
and the return of Octavianus [Caesar] and his army from thence, that the value of money fell one half,
and the prices of provisions and all vendible wares was doubled thereon.’ Caesar celebrated his victories
in a three-days’ triumph, — a triumph which Cleopatra herself would have graced, as one of the royal
captives, had she not artfully caused herself to be bitten by the fatal asp.”64
Rome’s conquest and destruction of Jerusalem. “The next great enterprise of the Romans after the
overthrow of Egypt, was the expedition against Judea, and the capture and destruction of Jerusalem. The
holy covenant is doubtless the covenant which God has maintained with his people, under different
forms, in different ages of the world, that is, with all believers in him. The Jews rejected Christ; and,
according to the prophecy that all who would not hear that prophet should be cut off, they were
destroyed out of their own land, and scattered to every nation under heaven. And while Jews and
Christians alike suffered under the oppressive hands of the Romans, it was doubtless in the reduction of
Judea especially, that the exploits mentioned in the text were exhibited.
“Under Vespasian the Romans invaded Judea, and took the cities of Galilee, Chorazin, Bethsaida,
and Capernaum, where Christ had been rejected. They destroyed the inhabitants, and left nothing but
ruin and desolation. Titus besieged Jerusalem. He drew a trench around it, according to the prediction of

63 Ibid., p. 278.
64 Ibid.

37
the Saviour. A terrible famine ensued, the equal of which the world has, perhaps at no other time
witnessed.
“Moses had predicted that in the terrible calamities to come upon the Jews if they departed from
God, even the tender and delicate woman should eat her own children in the straitness of the siege
wherewith their enemies should distress them. Under the siege of Jerusalem by Titus, a literal fulfilment
of this prediction occurred; and he, hearing of the inhuman deed, but forgetting that he was the one who
was driving them to such direful extremities, swore the eternal extirpation of the accursed city and
people.
“Jerusalem fell in A.D. 70. As an honor to himself, the Roman commander had determined to
save the temple; but the Lord had said that there should not remain one stone upon another which
should not be thrown down. A Roman soldier seized a brand of fire, and, climbing upon the shoulders of
his comrades, thrust it into one of the windows of the beautiful structure. It was soon in the arms of the
devouring element. The frantic efforts of the Jews to extinguish the flames were seconded by Titus
himself, but all in vain.
“Seeing that the temple must perish, Titus rushed in, and bore away the golden candlestick, the
table of show-bread, and the volume of the law, wrapped in golden tissue. The candlestick was
afterward deposited in Vespasian’s Temple of Peace, and copied on the triumphal arch of Titus, where
its mutilated image is yet to be seen.
“The siege of Jerusalem lasted five months. In that siege eleven hundred thousand Jews
perished, and ninety-seven thousand were taken prisoners. The city was so amazingly strong that Titus
exclaimed, when viewing the ruins, ‘We have fought with the assistance of God;’ but it was completely
leveled, and the foundations of the temple were plowed up by Tarentius Rufus. The duration of the
whole war was seven years, and one million four hundred and sixty-two thousand (1,462,000) persons
are said to have fallen victims to its awful horrors.
“Thus this power performed great exploits, and again returned to his own land.”65
In addition, at this time, starting from Emperor Nero, pagan Rome as the king of the North
carried on a severe persecution of Christians that lasted till Emperor Constantine the Great in the early
part of the 4th Century.

Relocation of the Capital of the Roman Empire

65 Ibid., pp. 278, 279.

38
The Prophecy of Daniel 11:29
“At the time appointed he shall return, and come toward the south; but it shall not be as the former, or as
the latter.”

Its Fulfillment

The time appointed refers most likely to the end of the prophetic “time” mentioned in verse 24.
This period ended in A.D. 330, 360 years after the defeat of Egypt as the king of the South at the battle of
Actium. At this time Rome does not move to the south, to conquer Egypt, as in former times, or to Judea
to conquer Jerusalem as in latter times, but Rome moves toward the south by moving the capital of the
Roman Empire from the city of Rome to Constantinople, in Asia Minor. If one travels from the city of
Rome to Egypt over land, the move to Constantinople which is on the way to Egypt can be considered a
move towards the south.
Smith mentioned that the previous moves of Rome, the king of the North, “were expeditions
which resulted in conquest and glory. This one led to demoralization and ruin. The removal of the seat of
empire to Constantinople [in A.D. 330] was the signal for the downfall of the empire. Rome then lost its
prestige. The western division was exposed to the incursions of foreign enemies. On the death of
Constantine, the Roman empire was divided into three parts, between his three sons, Constantius,
Constantine II, and Constans. Constantine II and Constans quarreled, and Constans, being victor, gained
the supremacy of the whole West. He was soon slain by one of his commanders, who, in turn, was
shortly after defeated by the surviving emperor, and in despair ended his own days, A.D. 353. The
barbarians of the North now began their incursions, and extended their conquests till the imperial
power of the West expired in A.D. 476.”66

Conflict Between Arian Kingdoms and Papal Rome

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:30

“For the ships of Chittim shall come against him: therefore he shall be grieved, and return, and have
indignation against the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return, and have intelligence with
them that forsake the holy covenant.”

Its Fulfillment

66 Ibid., p. 280.

39
 To interpret this text, it is helpful to understand where we are in the timeline of prophetic
history. Up till verse 29 we have been dealing with the power that was introduced in verse 16 as pagan
Rome that occupied the role of the king of the North. Now we begin dealing with an additional phase of
Rome. Ellen G. White’s comments on this text are helpful: “The prophecy in the eleventh of Daniel has
nearly reached its complete fulfillment. Much of the history that has taken place in fulfillment of this
prophecy will be repeated. In the thirtieth verse a power is spoken of that ‘shall be grieved, and return,
and have indignation against the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return, and have
intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant.’”67 Here she points out the beginning of a new
phase of Rome, papal Rome. This power is upset because of the ships of Chittim that come against the
king of the North, with the result that papal Rome “shall be grieved, and return, and have indignation
against the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return, and have intelligence with them that
forsake the holy covenant.”
What are “the ships of Chittim” that afflict papal Rome? Many have tried to identify the ships of
Chittim but have failed because they did not take into account the context of papal Rome. In identifying
the ships in the context of papal Rome as the king of the North, Smith came to the following helpful
insight in prophetic history: “What country or power is meant by Chittim? Dr. A. Clarke, on Isa.23:1, has
this note: ‘From the land of Chittim it is revealed to them. The news of the destruction of Tyre by
Nebuchadnezzar is said to be brought to them from Chittim, the islands and coasts of the Mediterranean;
for the Tyrians, says Jerome, on verse 6, when they saw they had no other means of escape, fled in their
ships, and took refuge in Carthage, and in the islands of the Ionian and AEgean Seas. So also Jochri on the
same place.’ Kitto gives the same locality to Chittim; namely, the coast and islands of the Mediterranean;
and the mind is carried by the testimony of Jerome to a definite and celebrated city situated in that land;
that is, Carthage.
“Was ever a naval warfare with Carthage as a base of operations, waged against the Roman
empire? We have but to think of the terrible onslaught of the Vandals upon Rome under the fierce
Genseric, to answer readily in the affirmative. Sallying every spring from the port of Carthage at the head
of his numerous and well-disciplined naval forces, he spread consternation through all the maritime
provinces of the empire. That this is the work brought to view is further evident when we consider that
we are brought down in the prophecy to this very time. In verse 29, the transfer of empire to
Constantinople we understood to be mentioned. Following in due course of time, as the next remarkable
revolution, came the irruptions of the barbarians of the North, prominent among which was the Vandal
war already mentioned. The years A.D. 428-468 mark the career of Genseric.

67 Ellen G. White, Manuscript Releases, vol. 13, p. 394.

40
 “‘He shall be grieved and return.’ This may have reference to the desperate efforts which were
made to dispossess Genseric of the sovereignty of the seas, the first by Majorian, the second by Leo, both
of which proved to be utter failures; and Rome was obliged to submit to the humiliation of seeing its
provinces ravaged, and its ‘eternal city’ pillaged by the enemy. . ..
“‘Indignation against the covenant;’ that is, the Holy Scriptures, the book of the covenant. A
revolution of this nature was accomplished in Rome. The Heruli, Goths, and Vandals, who conquered
Rome, embraced the Arian faith, and became enemies of the Catholic Church. It was especially for the
purpose of exterminating this heresy that Justinian decreed the pope to be the head of the church and
the corrector of heretics. The Bible soon came to be regarded as a dangerous book that should not be
read by the common people, but all questions in dispute were to be submitted to the pope. Thus was
indignity heaped upon God’s word. And the emperors of Rome, the eastern division of which still
continued, had intelligence, or connived with the Church of Rome, which had forsaken the covenant, and
constituted the great apostasy, for the purpose of putting down ‘heresy.’ The man of sin was raised to his
presumptuous throne by the defeat of the Arian Goths, who then held possession of Rome, in A.D. 538.”68

The Papacy Attacks God’s People Under Clovis and Justinian

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:31

“And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away
the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate."

Its Fulfillment

From this time on, prophetic history reveals the attack on God’s people by the papacy as the king
of the North after the fall of the Roman Empire in A.D. 476. Some of the most important features will be
presented below.

“And arms shall stand on his part.”

This phrase reveals that the king of the North, the papacy, will be supported by the “arms” of secular
powers. History shows that the rise of the power of the papacy was especially due to the support Clovis,
king of the Franks, and several of the Catholic rulers of the Roman Empire.
First we consider the role of Clovis, the barbarian king of the Franks. He was the first king to
offer his military power to the Roman Catholic Church to expand its influence. Clovis, a pagan king,

68 Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, pp. 280-282.

41
married Clotilde, a Catholic princess of the kingdom of Burgundy. Through her influence he became
favorable toward Roman Catholicism. In a battle against the Alemanni, as he was about to be defeated,
he called out to the God of his wife, promising to serve Him if he would be victorious. When the battle
ended in an unexpected victory for the Franks, he followed through on his promise and was baptized
into the Catholic Church in A.D. 508. Thus he became the first of the ten barbarian kingdoms that
invaded the Roman Empire to accept the Roman Catholic religion. The Roman bishops urged him to use
his talents to the advancement of Roman Catholicism by destroying the Arian heretics and pagan
powers. He defeated the Arian Visigoths in France. In time, through the powerful military operations of
the Frankish kings, most of the other pagan kingdoms were forced to accept Roman Catholicism. Clovis
was considered the New Constantine and the first King of Roman Catholicism. Other titles he received
were the “Eldest Son of the Church” and “Most Christian Majesty.”
Next comes the role of some Catholic rulers of the Roman Empire who were instrumental in
removing the Arian heresy in behalf of the papacy. At the collapse of the Western Roman Empire in A.D.
476, the Arian Kingdom of the Heruli established itself under its king Odoacer in Italy. The relations
between the Heruli and the Roman Catholics did not flourish. To remove the harmful influence of the
Heruli on the Catholic Church, Emperor Zeno gave permission to the Arian Kingdom of the Ostrogoths,
who were looking for territorial expansion, to take the area of the Heruli in Italy. The Ostrogoths, under
leadership of King Theodoric, utterly defeated the Heruli in A.D. 493 and took over Italy. Thus one of the
ten kingdoms was eliminated. Although under the reign of Theodoric the relations with the Catholics
were much more conciliatory, the situation deteriorated with subsequent rulers of the Ostrogoths.
Shortly afterwards the Arian kingdoms of the Vandals and the Ostrogoths were eliminated
through the politics of another Roman Emperor, Justinian the Great. During the reign of Justinian I the
power of the papacy was significantly strengthened. Justinian’s aspiration for the Empire was to
increase the Empire to its former glory with one emperor and one Catholic religion under one spiritual
leader, the bishop of Rome. In this empire there could not be room for pagans, Jews, and Arian
Christians; all must convert to Catholicism. Justinian took some of the following steps to accomplish his
goals.
The century-old struggle between the bishop of Rome and the patriarch of Constantinople for
the leadership of the Catholic Church, Justinian decided in favor of Rome. When Justinian revised the
Roman law code he incorporated a letter written to the Roman bishop, making him the head over all
churches of the Roman Empire. Justinian’s letter reads as follows:
“‘Justinian, victor, pious, fortunate, famous, triumphant, ever Augustus, to John, the most holy
Archbishop and Patriarch of the noble city of Rome. Paying honor to the Apostolic See and to Your
Holiness, as always has been and is our desire, and honoring your blessedness as a father, we hasten to
bring to the knowledge of Your Holiness all that pertains to the condition of the churches, since it has

42
always been our great aim to safeguard the unity of your Apostolic See and the position of the holy
churches of God which now prevails and abides securely without any disturbing trouble. Therefore we
have been sedulous to subject and unite all the priests of the Orient throughout its whole extent to the
see of Your Holiness. Whatever questions happen to be mooted at present, we have thought necessary to
be brought to Your Holiness’s knowledge, however clear and unquestionable they may be, and though
firmly held and taught by all the clergy in accordance with the doctrine of your Apostolic See; for we do
not suffer that anything which is mooted, however clear and unquestionable, pertaining to the state of
the churches, should fail to be made known to Your Holiness, as being the head of all the churches. For,
as we have said before, we are zealous for the increase of the honor and authority of your see in all
respects.’ [Codex Justiniani, lib. 1, tit. 1; translation as given by R. F. Littledale, The Petrine Claims, p.
293.]”69
Soon, Justinian took steps to eradicate heresy in the Roman Empire. He declared war on the two
remaining Arian kingdoms, the Vandals and Ostrogoths, that had settled in parts of the Roman Empire.
Earlier the Arian kingdom of the Heruli had been eliminated by the invading Ostrogoths in 493.
Justinian’s general Belisarius thoroughly defeated the Vandals in 534, thus eliminating the second Arian
kingdom that opposed Roman Catholics. Next was the war against the Ostrogoths so that Italy could
again be a part of the Roman Empire and Justinian’s decree to elevate the pope to be the head of all
churches in the Roman Empire could be implemented. The decisive battle between Justinian’s forces and
the Ostrogoths took place in the siege of Rome in 538, when the Ostrogoths were decisively defeated and
Justinian’s decree was implemented. Thus the arms or military powers of Catholic kingdoms were
successively used to support the papacy.

“And they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength.”

The Catholic political powers of the empire would “pollute the sanctuary of strength,” which would
have a devastating effect on the faithful Christians. It was the introduction of pagan teachings and
traditions in Christianity that polluted the biblical teachings or doctrines of the true believers, the true
remnant church. It especially affected the doctrine of the way of salvation through the intercessory
ministry of Christ’s priesthood in heaven for the believers that was replaced by the idolatrous sacrifice
of the mass and a system of earthly sanctuary service with a human priesthood. Those Christians who
remained strong and faithful were persecuted by the secular Catholic powers obedient to the leadership
of the Catholic Church. Their refusal to comply with the dictates of the papacy resulted in persecutions
and mass executions.

69 Smith, The Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation, rev. ed. (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1944), p. 275.

43
 Change of Church-State Relations in 508

“And shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh
desolate.”
The Catholic rulers within the Roman Empire would be instrumental in taking away the “daily” and
replacing it with the abomination of desolation. Presently there are two views of the “daily,” as the word
“sacrifice” has been supplied and is not in the original. The interpretation of this text needs to be done in
the light of Daniel 12:11, “And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the
abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.” This
time prophecy points to something significant that took place in the year A.D. 508 regarding the
replacement of the daily with the abomination of desolation.
One view of the “daily” interprets the “daily” or “continual” not as “daily sacrifice” but as the
“daily or continual abomination.” This interpretation is done in the context of the transition in history
from pagan Rome (Dan 11:16-30) to papal Rome (11:31-45) in the 6th century. This transition is also
reflected in the two phases of the little horn in Daniel 8 and the two phases of the terrible beast of Daniel
7. In Matthew 24:15 Jesus refers to the “abomination of desolation” as the pagan Roman armies
surrounding Jerusalem which is a reference to the destruction of Jerusalem by the armies of pagan Rome
in Daniel 9:26, 27. This view shows that the Catholic rulers are responsible for taking away the “daily
abomination” of the paganism of the Roman Empire and putting in its place the “abomination that
maketh desolate” which is the papal abomination or apostasy. This view has in mind that in the book of
Daniel there are abominations and desolations (plural), one of pagan Rome (Dan 9:26, 27) and another
that of papal Rome (Dan 12:11). This interpretation conveys the idea that Catholic political powers
replaced the pagan idolatry of the Roman Empire by the papal idolatry, which is in reality baptized
paganism. Commenting on the abominations, Smith wrote:
“More than one abomination, therefore, treads down the church; that is, so far as the church is
concerned, both paganism and the papacy are abominations. But as distinguished from each other, the
language is restricted, and one is the "daily" desolation, and the other is pre-eminently the transgression
or "abomination" of desolation.
“How was the daily, or paganism, taken away? As this is spoken of in connection with the placing
or setting up of the abomination of desolation, or the papacy, it must denote, not merely the nominal
change of the religion of the empire from paganism to Christianity, as on the conversion, so-called, of
Constantine, but such an eradication of paganism from all the elements of the empire, that the way
would be all open for the papal abomination to arise and assert its arrogant claims. Such a revolution as

44
this, plainly defined, was accomplished; but not for nearly two hundred years after the death of
Constantine.” 70
The other view of the “daily” interprets the “daily” in the context of the heavenly sanctuary
ministry of Jesus. This presents the idea that the Catholic powers took away the understanding of
Christ’s mediatorial ministry in the heavenly sanctuary and put in its place the idolatrous sacrifice of the
mass. Each view of the “daily” needs to be evaluated in the light of events surrounding the year A.D. 508.
Now we should ask, “What is the connection of the year 508 and the contribution of Clovis to the
taking away of the daily and putting in its place the abomination of desolation?” To understand this
connection, it is necessary to look at the church-state relationship before and since Clovis’s reign. When,
in the early part of the fourth century, Constantine became emperor and began to favor the Catholic
body of Christians, his acceptance of Christianity became a milestone in the history of the Empire, which
resulted in Catholic Christianity’s gradually replacing the paganism of the Roman religion. A prominent
study by Jean Zukowski on church-state relations within the Roman Empire from A.D. 306 to 814 gives
the following perspective:
“Throughout his reign, Constantine managed Christian theological controversies that threatened
his plans to unify the empire through Catholicism, establishing a religious policy that encompassed (1)
diplomatic work, allowing the church to solve its own problems, (2) summoning of church councils, and
(3) imposition of council decisions. At the end of Constantine’s reign, Catholic Christianity did not become
the state church, but it replaced paganism as the source of the empire’s prosperity.”71
Here Emperor Constantine is in control and uses the church for his politics, just as the pagan
Roman emperors before him had done using the pagan Roman religion. They were in charge of the
religious situation of the empire. However, slowly church-state relations began to change, increasing the
power of the church. By the time of the reign of Clovis, king of the Franks, the association between the
monarch and the church had reached a new type of church-state relationship that allowed the
establishment of the papal apostasy in the Christian Church. Commenting on the importance of the year
508, Zukowski wrote:
“A.D. 508 is the most significant year for the church-state relationship in Clovis’s reign, since it
marked the culmination of the union between the Franks and the Catholic Church. In this year, Clovis
eliminated the Arian threat in Gaul, paid homage to Saint Martin, and confirmed his allegiance to the
Catholic Church through his baptism. The alliance between Clovis and the Catholic Church in Gaul that
was created in 508 with Clovis’s baptism represented the beginning of a union between throne and altar,
a model of church-state relationship where the king and the bishops would work together in distinct

70 Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 1897 ed., pp. 282, 283.
71 Jean C. Zukowski, The Role and Status of the Catholic Church in the Church-State Relationship within the Roman Empire
from A.D. 306 to 814, p. 343.

45
roles—bishops as guides and kings as executors—for the benefit of the state. This model differs from the
church-state model of the Roman Empire,where even under Catholic emperors, the emperor controlled
religious matters summoning councils, directing them to the final decisions, and enforcing the decisions
through imperial legislation. Thus, Clovis’s baptism in 508 can be considered the starting point of
transition between two systems—the church-state government of the old Roman Empire and the church-
state government of the new empire under Germanic kings, where the church began to guide the king in
the execution of state policies. This church-state model of cooperation between the ruler and the clergy
would later be called the Holy Roman Empire, where the church would eventually achieve jurisdictional
supremacy over the state.”72
From these events we can see that the church-state system of paganism was replaced by a new
church-state system that gave the papacy secular power that governed Christendom till the French
Revolution, when the secular power of the papacy was abolished by Napoleon.

God’s People During the Papal Persecutions of the Dark Ages

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:32, 33

“And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do
know their God shall be strong, and do exploits. And they that understand among the people shall
instruct many; yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days.”

Its Fulfillment

Those who discard the covenant are those who do not care about God’s plan of salvation as
expressed in the Scriptures and about His law that under the new covenant is written in the heart. These
persons fall for the flatteries of the king of the North and become corrupted by the teachings and
counsels of the papacy. These flatteries may consist of the bestowal of wealth, honors, or positions.
Yet not everyone will fall for the papal flatteries. Smith wrote, “At the same time a people shall
exist who know their God; and these shall be strong, and do exploits. These were those who kept pure
religion alive in the earth during the dark ages of papal tyranny, and performed marvelous acts of self-
sacrifice and religious heroism in behalf of their faith. Prominent among these stand the Waldenses,
Albigenses, Huguenots, etc.”73
Faithful believers who understand the gospel of salvation will continue to share with others the
message that Christ is the only mediator between God and humanity and the source of righteousness by

72 Ibid., pp. 348, 349.

73 Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, p. 289.

46
faith. This work results in the time of great tribulation of God’s people. The manner of the papal
persecution would be fourfold: through the sword or murder, by the flame or burned at the stake, by
captivity or imprisonment, and by spoil or confiscation of property. The “many days” refers to the
prophetic time period of persecution mentioned seven times in Daniel and Revelation as “time, times,
and half a time” (3 ½ years), the 1260 days, or 42 months (Dan. 7:25; 12:7; Rev. 12:6, 14; 13:5). This is
the 1260 years of papal supremacy.

The Help of the Protestant Reformation Against the Papacy

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:34

“Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen [helped] with a little help; but many shall cleave to them
with flatteries.”

Its Fulfillment

God’s faithful witnessed during the Dark Ages of papal persecution were killed. However, they
are not forgotten. The promise was that they would receive a little help through the Protestant
Reformation as an encouragement to remain faithful in spite of the relentless waves of papal
persecution. Yet, not everyone embraced the Reformation from worthy motives. Smith commented:
“In Revelation 12, where this same papal persecution is brought to view, we read that the earth
helped the woman by opening her mouth, and swallowing up the flood which the dragon cast out after
her. The great Reformation by Luther and his co-workers furnished the help here foretold. The German
states espoused the Protestant cause, protected the reformers, and restrained the work of persecution
so furiously carried on by the papal church. But when they should be helped, and the cause begin to
become popular, many were to cleave unto them with flatteries, or embrace the cause from unworthy
motives, be insincere, hollow-hearted, and speak smooth and friendly words through a policy of self-
interest.” 74

Persecutions from the Reformation till the Time of the End

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:35

“And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even
to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.”

74 Ibid., p. 290.

47
 Its Fulfillment

This text describes the period since the Reformation. Even in the period after the Reformation,
when the papacy’s onslaught of persecution was more restrained, a number of God’s faithful witnesses
who understood the gospel would fall. They would be tried by the papal persecutions during the
Catholic Counter-Reformation and the subsequent devastating wars of religion. These persecutions
would purify them so they will be clothed with Christ’s righteousness. This period of intermittent
persecutions would continue, according to the text, till the time of the end, which began at the end of the
1260 years in 1798. The 1260 years is God’s prophetic “time appointed” that started in 538 and
terminated in 1798. It was in 1798 that the secular power of the papacy was abolished by the edict of
the French Republic, read by Napoleon’s general Berthier on Capitoline Hill in Rome.
Commenting on the persecutions during and since the Reformation, Smith wrote, “Though
restrained, the spirit of persecution was not destroyed. It broke out whenever there was opportunity.
Especially was this the case in England. The religious state of that kingdom was fluctuating, it being
sometimes under Protestant, and sometimes papal jurisdiction, according to the religion of the ruling
house. The bloody Queen Mary was a mortal enemy to the Protestant cause, and multitudes fell victims
to her relentless persecutions. And this condition of affairs was to last more or less to the time of the
end.”75

The Blasphemous Character of the Papacy

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:36

“And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every
god, and shall speak marvelous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be
accomplished; for that that is determined shall be done.”

Its Fulfillment

75 Ibid., p. 291.

48
 The passage of Daniel 11:36 to 39 describes in more detail the character of the papacy as the
king of the North. The king here is not a new power but the power already at work earlier. This
conclusion is based on the definite article “the” before “king,” which indicates that this king has already
been introduced in the previous verses.

“And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above
every god, and shall speak marvelous things against the God of gods.”
The character of the king of the North, the papacy, who “shall do according to his will; and . . . shall
exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god,” shows that he is identical to the man of sin in 2
Thessalonians 2:4 and the little horn power of Daniel 7:25. Both of these powers have been identified as
the papacy. Furthermore, this king shall speak marvelous things against the God of gods, which is also
what the little horn of Daniel 7:25 does, who is also the papacy. All these actions the king of the North
performs with success till God’s wrath or indignation shall be accomplished at the end of the 1260 years
with the deadly wound in 1798, ending the secular power of the papacy.

The Papacy Departed from the Teachings of the Apostles

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:37

“Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall
magnify himself above all.”

Its Fulfillment

The papacy departed from the beliefs and practices of the New Testament church of the apostles
and supplanted its teachings with various pagan traditions. Thus it no longer followed “the God of his
fathers.” In addition, it did not regard “the desire of women.” This is reflected in the teaching that
required clergy to be celibate. By contrast, God’s ideal for church ministers is that they should be able to
lead their families successfully. Instead, the papacy forbids marriage for the Roman Catholic clergy. This
teaching that forbids marriages is called a doctrine of devils (1 Tim 4:1, 3). This and many other
teachings instituted by the papacy show that he does not “regard any god” but will “magnify himself
above all.”

Idolatry of the Papacy

49
The Prophecy of Daniel 11:38
“But in his estate shall he honor the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honor
with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.”

Its Fulfillment

He shall “honor the God of forces.”

A further characteristic of the papacy is that in place of the true God who freely offers to everyone the
gospel of grace and salvation out of love for the sinful human race without any compulsion or force, the
papacy honors the god of forces. As history has overwhelmingly shown, the papacy forms alliances with
others and uses their political, economic, and military force to achieve its goals of world domination.

“A god whom his fathers knew not shall he honor with gold, and silver, and with precious stones,
and pleasant things.”
The papal system of worship is identified as idolatry. Various commentators have identified the “god
whom his fathers knew not” in the Roman Catholic worship as the Virgin Mary. Her position in the
Catholic Church is similar to that of Jesus Christ. Together with the godhead she mediates grace and
forgiveness to sinners. She has a saving office and through her intercession eternal salvation is
mediated. Her images are covered with gold, silver, and precious stones, gifts of the faithful worshipers.
Besides Mary, there are other objects of worship, such as the saints who are believed to intercede for the
worshipers.

More Papal Idolatry

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:39

“Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase
with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain.”

Its Fulfillment

The strange god is again a reference to Mary as an intercessory mediator. The papacy has
elevated the humanity of Mary to the level of deity, which is pure idolatry. She has become an
indispensable support in daily living for those who believe in her role in salvation. As a result, her

50
reputation has “increased with glory” as a source of power to obtain eternal life. Mary’s influence
dominates the lives of many. She has been honored as patron saint of cities, provinces, countries, and
continents. Various vocations or professions claim her as patron saint.
The papacy has also made the apostles and various exemplary Catholics patron saints. Catholics
have worshiped these patron saints to obtain their intercessory services. Consequently, the papacy has
made them rule over many believers. In addition, the papacy and leading bishops have divided
geographical territories into various dioceses under bishops, each responsible for collecting
contributions for the papacy. When the Western Hemisphere was discovered, the pope divided the new
continent between Spain and Portugal, while France occupied most of North America, calling it New
France.

War Between the Kings of the South and the North in the Time of the End (Dan 11:40-43)

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:40

“And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come
against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships: and he shall enter
into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.”

The King of the South Attacks the King of the North

Its Fulfillment

“And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him.”
The passage of Daniel 11:40-45 deals with events in prophetic history since the beginning of the “time
of the end.” Some events have already taken place, other events are in the process of taking place, and
still others are to be fulfilled in the very near future. The king of the North is still papal Rome that came
on the scene in verse 30. The “time of the end” is a period that began when the deadly wound of the
papacy, the king of the North, took place in 1798 during the French Revolution, and it will extend till the
second advent.
The question that for some time has challenged commentators and continues to do so is the
identity of the king of the South, who has pushed at the papacy since the time of the end. The last time
this king was mentioned was in verse 25. That passage referred to the final, monumental, and decisive
battle in 31 B.C. between pagan Rome and the last vestiges of the Greek kingdom in Egypt that ended in
the defeat of Queen Cleopatra and Mark Antony and a triumph of the Roman Empire under Octavian,
who then became Caesar Augustus. In 30 B.C. Egypt became a Roman province. Now the king of the

51
South appears again, but during the time of the end after 1798. There is no evidence that the king of the
South at this time is still literal Egypt that has any negative impact on the papacy as the king of the
North. So who is the king of the South here?
Important principle of prophetic interpretation. Many Christians are not aware of a principle of
prophetic interpretation, called Christ-centered or Cross-centered prophetic interpretation, which pays
attention to the changes that took place in the status of Israel as God’s people when we move from the
Old Testament era to the New Testament era. In the light of the 70-week prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 and
Jesus’ teaching on the kingdom, it becomes clear that the kingdom will be taken away from literal Israel
and given to spiritual Israel (Mt 21:33-43). What are the far-reaching implications for the way we
interpret Bible prophecy when the prophecy covers a time period that falls in the New Testament era?
How does this affect the literal geographical names and places from Old Testament times when they are
being used during the New Testament era and applied to the time of the end?
Let us take the term “Israel.” Under the Old Testament, “Israel” as God’s people refers to “literal
Israel,” a nation that resides in “Palestine,” a literal geographical area in the Middle East. Its sanctuary of
worship is the earthly sanctuary where its priests minister. Its most dangerous enemy is the literal
nation of Babylon.
Under the New Testament, after the fulfillment of the 70-week prophecy of Daniel 9, the term
“Israel” in prophecy no longer refers to “literal Israel” but to “spiritual Israel.” Spiritual Israel consists of
God’s special people that are not confined to any particular geographical area but live throughout the
world. Its sanctuary of worship is the heavenly sanctuary where Jesus Christ ministers in their behalf
(Heb 7:25; 8:1, 2). Its most dangerous enemy is spiritual Babylon that is located throughout the world,
especially described in Rev 17 and identified as the papacy. However, besides “Babylon the Great,” the
papacy has been called “the great harlot,” “mother of harlots and of the abominations of the earth” (Rev
17), the “little horn” (Dan 7), the sea beast (Rev 13), the “man of sin” or iniquity, the “son of perdition” (2
Thes 2), and the “abomination of desolation” (Dan 11:31; 12:11). Since all these names characterize the
devastating persecuting power against God’s faithful, it should not be a surprise that the last persecuting
power in Daniel 11 just before the deliverance of the saints by Michael should be identified under the
name “the king of the North” and represent the papacy.
Following this reasoning, in the time of the end, the king of the South is no longer literal Egypt
located in a literal geographical area, but a power that has the characteristics of spiritual Egypt that
opposes the papacy on a global worldwide scale. Where do we find such a power during the time of the
end?
During the 1260 years of papal domination the Bible informs us that God’s two witnesses, the
Old and New Testaments, share their testimony “clothed in sackcloth” (Rev 11:3). The public
proclamation of the gospel and the teaching of the Bible were prohibited by the Catholic Church. Toward

52
the end of this time of persecution a power would emerge that is called “the beast that ascends out of the
bottomless pit” that “will make war against them, overcome them, and kill them” (Rev 11:7). This
prophecy was fulfilled in the history of the French Revolution. Ellen White described these events and
the causes of this Revolution:
“The war against the Bible, carried forward for so many centuries in France, culminated in the
scenes of the Revolution. That terrible outbreaking was but the legitimate result of Rome’s suppression
of the Scriptures. . . . It presented the most striking illustration which the world has ever witnessed of
the working out of the papal policy—an illustration of the results to which for more than a thousand
years the teaching of the Roman Church had been tending. The suppression of the Scriptures during the
period of papal supremacy was foretold by the prophets; and the Revelator points also to the terrible
results that were to accrue especially to France from the domination of the ‘man of sin.’”76
Commenting about the new power that was to arise near the end of the 1260 years of papal
supremacy referred to in Revelation 11:7, White said: “‘When they shall have finished [are finishing]
their testimony.’ The period when the two witnesses were to prophesy clothed in sackcloth, ended in
1798. As they were approaching the termination of their work in obscurity, war was to be made upon
them by the power represented as ‘the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit.’ In many of the
nations of Europe the powers that ruled in church and state had for centuries been controlled by Satan
through the medium of the papacy. But here is brought to view a new manifestation of satanic power.
“It had been Rome’s policy, under a profession of reverence for the Bible, to keep it locked up in
an unknown tongue and hidden away from the people. Under her rule the witnesses prophesied ‘clothed
in sackcloth.’ But another power—the beast from the bottomless pit—was to arise to make open,
avowed war upon the word of God.” 77
The outworkings of this new power are described in Rev 11:8, 9. White explains the fulfillment
of these texts as follows: “‘The great city’ in whose streets the witnesses are slain, and where their dead
bodies lie, is ‘spiritually’ Egypt. Of all nations presented in Bible history, Egypt most boldly denied the
existence of the living God and resisted His commands. No monarch ever ventured upon more open and
highhanded rebellion against the authority of Heaven than did the king of Egypt. When the message was
brought him by Moses, in the name of the Lord, Pharaoh proudly answered: “Who is Jehovah, that I
should hearken unto His voice to let Israel go? I know not Jehovah, and moreover I will not let Israel go.”
Exodus 5:2, A.R.V. This is atheism, and the nation represented by Egypt would give voice to a similar
denial of the claims of the living God and would manifest a like spirit of unbelief and defiance. ‘The great
city’ is also compared, ‘spiritually,’ to Sodom. The corruption of Sodom in breaking the law of God was

76 Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy Between Christ and Satan (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press), pp. 265, 266.
77 Ibid., pp. 268, 269. Italics mine.

53
especially manifested in licentiousness. And this sin was also to be a pre-eminent characteristic of the
nation that should fulfill the specifications of this scripture.
“According to the words of the prophet, then, a little before the year 1798 some power of satanic
origin and character would rise to make war upon the Bible. And in the land where the testimony of
God’s two witnesses should thus be silenced, there would be manifest the atheism of the Pharaoh and
the licentiousness of Sodom.”
“This prophecy has received a most exact and striking fulfillment in the history of France. During
the Revolution, in 1793, ‘the world for the first time heard an assembly of men, born and educated in
civilization, and assuming the right to govern one of the finest of the European nations, uplift their
united voice to deny the most solemn truth which man’s soul receives, and renounce unanimously the
belief and worship of a Deity.’—Sir Walter Scott, Life of Napoleon, vol. 1, ch. 17. “France is the only nation
in the world concerning which the authentic record survives, that as a nation she lifted her hand in open
rebellion against the Author of the universe. Plenty of blasphemers, plenty of infidels, there have been,
and still continue to be, in England, Germany, Spain, and elsewhere; but France stands apart in the
world’s history as the single state which, by the decree of her Legislative Assembly, pronounced that
there was no God, and of which the entire population of the capital, and a vast majority elsewhere,
women as well as men, danced and sang with joy in accepting the announcement.”—Blackwood’s
Magazine, November, 1870.78
“The atheistical power that ruled in France during the Revolution and the Reign of Terror, did
wage such a war against God and His holy word as the world had never witnessed. The worship of the
Deity was abolished by the National Assembly. Bibles were collected and publicly burned with every
possible manifestation of scorn. The law of God was trampled underfoot. The institutions of the Bible
were abolished. The weekly rest day was set aside, and in its stead every tenth day was devoted to
reveling and blasphemy. Baptism and the Communion were prohibited. And announcements posted
conspicuously over the burial places declared death to be an eternal sleep.”79
It was this atheistic spirit that characterized the new power of the beast out of the bottomless
pit (Rev 11:7). This new power formed the king of the South that pushed on the king of the North,
opposing the papacy on a global scale. It was this spirit of defiance against Roman Catholicism that
propelled the French revolutionary government to declare war on the papacy, take the pope captive, and
abolish his secular power in 1798. This was the deadly wound against the papacy predicted by John the
Revelator. Never since that time has the papacy been able to exercise the same secular power it had
during the 1260 years of its supreme reign. This shows that God can use the power of the wicked to
fulfill Bible prophecy and curtail Satan’s power over God’s people.

78 Ibid., pp. 269, 270.

79 Ibid., pp. 273, 274.

54
 This new atheistic power that originated during the French Revolution Satan further expanded
into a major power to oppose not only the papacy but Christianity. Atheism was developed into a system
of socialist government by the German philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in The Communist
Manifesto, published in 1848. Its most important application took place under Vladimir Lenin in Russia
and formed the foundation of the Bolshevik Revolution or Russian Revolution of 1917 and created the
Soviet Union. Under Stalin it became a world power, spreading the atheistic philosophy on a global scale.
Eventually it was embraced by nearly half of the world’s population, involving the Eastern European
countries, China, Laos, Vietnam, North Korea, and Cuba. All of them espoused atheism and strongly
opposed the king of the North, the papacy, wherever they could.

The King of the North’s Offensive Against the King of the South

“And the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with
horsemen, and with many ships: and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and
pass over.”
The last half of verse 40 points to a resurgence of papal power in the war against the atheistic
powers that ends with their defeat. The verse states that the king of the North, having been healed from
the deadly wound, will come against the king of the South with “chariots, and with horsemen, and with
many ships,” indicating it will use military and economic powers. The Vatican does not have these
weapons. However, historically it has obtained these powers through alliances with nations that had
these powers. A significant alliance took place toward the end of the 20th century. Cooperation between
the papacy under Pope John Paul II and the superpower of the United States under President Reagan
resulted in a secret Holy Alliance in 1982 that brought down the Empire of the Soviet Union in 1991,
within a period of 10 years. Since that time the papacy has been involved in evangelistic endeavors in
countries that have been reclaimed from communism.

The King of the North Invades the Glorious Land; Some Escape

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:41

“He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall
escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon.”

Its Fulfillment

55
“He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown:”
The passage of Daniel 11:41 deals with the invasion of the revived papacy into “the glorious land.”
What is the meaning of the “glorious land” in this verse? Earlier in verse 16 the glorious land is
mentioned where the king of the North shall stand and consume it. In that context the glorious land is
ancient Israel that is occupied by the king of the North, the pagan Roman Empire. Here the Roman
general Pompey conquered Judea and put an end to Israel’s independence, making it a Roman province
in 63 B.C. This took place under the dispensation of the Old Testament.
In verse 41 the “glorious land” refers to the New Testament time of the end, in which the Old
Testament’s geographical names and places have taken on a spiritual and global meaning. During the
Old Testament time the glorious land was Palestine, where literal Israel resided. In the New Testament
time of the end the glorious land has taken on a global spiritual meaning. Instead of focusing on literal
Israel, the verse focuses on spiritual Israel residing throughout the world. Here the verse refers to the
papacy as entering into the glorious land, which means that the papacy invades the non-Roman Catholic
Christian world, and many non-Catholic Christians will be overcome and will follow the papacy. Who are
these non-Catholic Christians? Obviously, the vast majority are Protestants. This means that the glorious
land represents especially the Protestant world. The verse indicates that during the time of the end the
papacy will make a powerful attempt to convince non-Catholic Christians, and especially Protestants, to
become a part of the Roman Catholic Church and return to the mother church. Roman Catholics try to
accomplish this through the ecumenical movement. Many Catholics and Protestants seem to think that
after 500 years, the Protest of the 16th century Reformation is over. In these ecumenical initiatives the
papacy is quite successful.
The text states that “many countries will be overthrown.” Note, however, that the word
“countries” is in italics in some translations, which means that it is not part of the original text. This
means that the text can also be read to say that through the efforts of the papacy “many people will be
overthrown.” The present involvement of the Roman Catholic Church in the ecumenical movement and
its success in winning over the cooperation and support of Protestants for the papacy’s goals is evidence
of the current fulfillment of this prophecy.

“But these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of
Ammon.”
Not everyone will be persuaded by the ecumenical initiatives of the king of the North, the papacy. The
prophecy predicts that “Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon” will escape being
conquered by the papacy. Who are Edom, Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon? From the Old
Testament we learn that these nations have a kinship relation to Abraham, the father of all believers.
The Edomites are descendants of Esau, the son of Isaac. The Moabites and the Ammonites are

56
descendants of Moab and Ammon, the sons of Lot, Abraham’s nephew. All of them had some knowledge
of the true God but had apostatized and were considered heathen. However, Isaiah prophesied that at
the end of time they will be reclaimed. “The Lord shall set His hand again the second time to recover the
remnant of His people” and “they shall lay their hand upon Edom and Moab; and the children of Ammon
shall obey them” (Is 11:11, 14). This return to God’s remnant in Isaiah’s prophecy is described in Daniel
11:41 as the escape of Edom, Moab and Ammon from the onslaught of the papacy in the time of the end.
These three groups of people are God’s people in the apostate religious systems of Babylon who reside
throughout the world, and they will positively respond to the loud cry of the three angels’ messages
proclaimed by the faithful remnant of Seventh-day Adventists.

The King of the North Decisively Conquers Egypt and Its Allies

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:42, 43

“He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape. But he
shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and
the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.”

Its Fulfillment

“He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape.”
The king of the North, the papacy, will in last instance attack what is left of the atheistic power of
spiritual Egypt. Although the Soviet Union has been overcome by the combined strategy of the papacy
and the United States and its allies, atheism still dominates in parts of the world such as China, Vietnam,
Laos, North Korea and Cuba. The papacy and its allies will also overcome the opposition of these nations
against the aim of the Vatican for world domination, especially with establishing Sunday laws world-
wide as its ultimate goal. In achieving that goal, the atheism of spiritual Egypt will be defeated.

“And the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.”

What about the Libyans and Ethiopians that will join the papacy? In the Old Testament these peoples
supported Egypt in its conflict with Babylon. According to Ezekiel 38:3-9, these countries who
surrounded Egypt helped Egypt in its war against Babylon. In verse Daniel 11:43, spiritual Libya and
spiritual Ethiopia represent those counties dominated by Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, and other non-
Christians who have supported the communistic block nations against Christian nations. When these
powers see the success of the papacy, they will give their support to the king of the North.

57
 The Three Angels’ Messages Bring About the Final Persecution

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:44

“But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with great
fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many.”

Its Fulfillment

“But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him.”
In Daniel 11:40-43 we observe the success of a revived papacy and its worldwide victory over the king
of the South and its allies. However, there remains an obstacle to the worldwide dominion of the king of
the North. That is caused by tidings out of the East and out of the North. In the Old Testament the North is
the literal place of God’s dwelling (Ps 48:1-2; Is 14:13). The East is the literal place from where God’s glory
comes (Ezek 43:1-4). Both the North and East can be considered as God’s dwelling places. During the time
of the end, both East and North can be considered in a symbolic sense as God’s dwelling places from
where deliverance comes. The sealing angel with the seal of the living God comes from the East to enable
God’s people to stand in the day of God’s wrath (Rev 6:17–7:1-3). Help for God’s people comes at the end
when the kings from the East come, representing the second coming of Christ with His angels (Rev 6:12).
In this context the tidings out of the east and out of the north are divine messages that involve
the last divine gospel message. This proclamation according to John is recorded in Revelation 14:6-12. It
is the messages of the three angels that unmask the nature and deception of the king of the North, the
papacy. The first angel’s message (Rev 14:6, 7) presents the everlasting gospel, calling people to
repentance because the “hour of God’s judgment” has begun. Now humanity is in the time of the
antitypical Day of Atonement, when Christ is finishing the final phase of His high-priestly ministry, the
judgment in the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary. Now humanity is presented with the standard
of judgment, the Ten Commandments, that calls everyone to worship the Creator by observing the
Sabbath. The second angel’s message (Rev 14:8) informs the world that Babylon is fallen because the
papacy, apostate Protestantism, and spiritualism have polluted all nations with their apostasy. The only
hope for human beings is to “Come out of her, My people” (Rev 18:4). The third angel’s message (Rev
14:9-11) presents the papacy as the beast and apostate Protestantism as the image of the beast and warns
people against worshiping the beast or its image and receiving its mark on one’s forehead or hand. Those
who follow these apostate systems a will be subject to the wrath of God. Here the final conflict is revealed,
the battle over the true worship of the Creator: Should human beings worship on Sabbath or Sunday?
Commenting on this final conflict, Ellen White commented:

58
 “The Sabbath will be the great test of loyalty, for it is the point of truth especially controverted.
When the final test shall be brought to bear upon men, then the line of distinction will be drawn between
those who serve God and those who serve Him not. While the observance of the false sabbath in
compliance with the law of the state, contrary to the fourth commandment, will be an avowal of allegiance
to a power that is in opposition to God, the keeping of the true Sabbath, in obedience to God’s law, is an
evidence of loyalty to the Creator. While one class, by accepting the sign of submission to earthly powers,
receive the mark of the beast, the other choosing the token of allegiance to divine authority, receive the
seal of God.”80
“Therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many.”
In this conflict the papacy knows that as long as faithful Seventh-day Adventists exist and proclaim these
three angels’ messages, this remnant will endanger the existence of the papacy. Just before probation
closes, the papacy and its allies launch a most terrible persecution. White describes this conflict in the
following terms:
“The two armies will stand distinct and separate, and this distinction will be so marked that
many who shall be convinced of truth will come on the side of God’s commandment-keeping people.
When this grand work is to take place in the battle, prior to the last closing conflict, many will be
imprisoned, many will flee for their lives from cities and towns, and many will be martyrs for Christ’s
sake in standing in defense of the truth” 81

Final Papal Strategy to Destroy God’s Remnant Ends in Its Defeat

The Prophecy of Daniel 11:45

“He will pitch his royal tents between the seas toward the beautiful holy mountain. But he will come to
his end, with no one to help him.” (New English Translation)

Its Fulfillment

“He will pitch his royal tents between the seas toward the beautiful holy mountain.”
The last verse of Daniel 11 shows the final attempt of the papacy to destroy God’s remnant that
survived the onslaught of persecution in the previous verse. His strategy is to put his royal tents, or the
centers of the systems of false papal worship, between the seas toward or facing the beautiful or
glorious holy mountain. Ancient Israel was situated between two seas, the Mediterranean Sea and the
Dead Sea. Revelation 17:15 shows that waters symbolize people. This indicates that the papacy will

80 Ibid., p. 605.
81 White, Maranatha, p. 199.

59
place its apostate worship between in the midst of peoples of the world, leading them toward the
beautiful or glorious holy mountain, God’s remnant, in a final global attack to destroy them.
The glorious holy mountain is located in the spiritual glorious land. Mount Zion is the mountain
of God’s holiness and His holy hill (Ps 48:1, 2; Ps 2:6). Furthermore, God’s people are compared with
Mount Zion. The Psalmist states, “those who trust in the Lord shall be shall be as mount Zion” (Ps 125:1).
At the close of the time of the end there is deliverance in spiritual Mount Zion and spiritual Jerusalem,
and anyone “who shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in
Jerusalem shall be deliverance” (Joel 2:32). This is the message of hope for the final generation. In
contrast to the papal system of false worship, these texts point to the center of true worship that
proclaims the message of righteousness by faith as the heart of the loud cry of the third angel’s message.
It is this last message of mercy that will be proclaimed from spiritual Mount Zion by God’s remnant, the
Seventh-day Adventist Church.

“But he will come to his end, with no one to help him.”

In the final offensive of the king of the North, the papacy, the text concludes, “but he will come to
his end, with no one to help him.” When the papacy at the head of spiritual Babylon issues the final death
decree against Sabbath keepers for not obeying the Sunday laws, probation will end for the
transgressors of God’s law. Then Michael stands up to deliver His people (Dan 12:1), and the papacy and
its followers come to their end during the seven last plagues that are especially directed against the
beast and his image. However, God’s people will be delivered.

The Islam Interpretation

Not all historicists follow the above-described Christ-centered prophetic method of

interpretation and its application to the time of the end. On the basis of a different hermeneutic, they
come to the conclusion that the king of the South is Islam. This hermeneutic assumes that before the fall
of the Roman Empire, symbols or players have a literal geopolitical meaning, but that from the breaking
up of the Roman Empire onward, most if not all of the symbols or players have a dual nature—i.e., a
literal geopolitical and also a spiritual religious nature. This means that the king of the North evolves
from primarily a literal geopolitical power during the Greek and Roman Empires to a literal geopolitical
and a spiritual religious power under the papacy. This hermeneutic blends a literal interpretation with a
spiritual interpretation and applies this blend to Daniel 11:23-45.
This dual approach, blending the literal and the spiritual, makes the interpretation of Daniel
11:40-45 very speculative. It presents the final conflict as a war between a papal-led Christianity (king of
the North) and Islam (king of the South). It considers the geographical locations of the texts as general

60
guidelines where the final conflict will take place. This means that the Glorious Land is literal Israel
(Dan. 11:41), and the Glorious or Beautiful Holy Mountain is literal Jerusalem (Dan 11:45). The “many
countries” (Dan 11:41) are the Islamic nations that will be defeated by the king of the North. Edom,
Moab, and Ammon (Dan 11:41) involve the regions of western Jordan, representing people within Islam
who don’t follow the king of the North. The nation of Egypt will be overthrown in the final battle and
represent countries that take up radical Islam (Dan 11:42, 43). Libya and Ethiopia represent the nations
that bear those names but also embrace most of northern Africa and stand for moderate Islam that will
follow the king of the North (Dan 11:43). Followers of this interpretation focus especially on the events
taking place in the Middle East, not on the strategy of the king of the North to deceive the non-Christian
world, destroy Protestantism, and delude God’s people.
A major problem of this geopolitical interpretation in giving the nation of Israel today a
prophetic role in the end-time scenario is that it is contrary to the fulfillment of the 70-week prophecy of
Daniel 9, which reveals that in A.D. 34 literal Israel is rejected as God’s covenant people. Since that time,
spiritual Israel is God’s covenant people. This means that identifying literal Israel as a fulfillment of Bible
prophecy during the Christian era is unbiblical and contrary to a Christocentric hermeneutic.

Conclusion

This study has used the historicist method of interpreting the apocalyptic prophecy of Daniel 11.
It followed a Christocentric, cross-centered interpretation in which kingdoms, countries, and places
before the cross are interpreted as having literal meanings and after the cross as having spiritual and
global meanings. This method is based on the understanding that the 70-week prophecy of Daniel 9
reveals that literal Israel in Palestine was replaced as God’s covenant people in A.D. 34 by spiritual
Israel, located worldwide. The transition from literal to spiritual Israel had a profound effect on the
interpretation of prophecy whose fulfillment takes place in the Christian era after the cross. Names such
as king of the North, king of the South, sanctuary, Glorious land, Glorious holy mountain, Edom, Moab,
Ammon, Egypt, Libya, and Ethiopia must be interpreted in a new-covenant spiritual sense. Failure to do
this or an inconsistent use of this hermeneutical principle has led to confusion in the interpretation of
Daniel 11.
To arrive at the proper meaning of the text, exegesis and historical events both need to be taken
into consideration in every detail of the text. If one aspect of the text does not fit the proper explanation
of the whole, one needs to look for another interpretation, until all elements of the text fit. Great care
should be taken with using exegetical arguments based on literary structures by non-historicist
scholars. Their reasoning is based on a non-historicist hermeneutic that leads to conclusions that
conflict with continuous-historicist interpretations. Consequently, we find that there are many

61
conflicting views on the last verses of Daniel 11. It is therefore commendable to follow the highly
effective rule of prophetic interpretation used by the early Adventists: “To know whether we have the
true historical event for the fulfillment of a prophecy. If you find every word of the prophecy (after the
figures are understood) is literally fulfilled, then you may know that your history is the true event. But if
one word lacks a fulfillment, then you must look for another event, or wait its future development. For
God takes care that history and prophecy doth agree, so that the true, believing children of God may
never be ashamed.”82 A departure from this simple principle has led to a misinterpretation of the last
part of Daniel 11 and resulted in much speculation about events to take place during the time of the end.

82 “Miller’s Rules of Bible Interpretation,” Apollos Hale, The Second Advent Manual . . . quoted in P. Gerard Damsteegt,

Foundations of the Seventh-day Adventist Message and Mission, Berrien Springs, MI.: Andrews University, 2017, p. 300.

62