Welcome back to my study/review of The Book of Daniel. If you missed the previous parts of this study, you can find them HERE.
Daniel 11:29-35
29 “At the time designated, he will come back to the south. But this time, things will turn out differently than before; 30 because ships from Kittim will come against him, so that his courage will fail him. Then, in retreat, he will take furious action against the holy covenant, again showing favor to those who abandon the holy covenant. 31 Armed forces will come at his order and profane the sanctuary and fortress. They will abolish the daily burnt offering and set up the abomination that causes desolation. 32 Those who act wickedly against the covenant he will corrupt with his blandishments, but the people who know their God will stand firm and prevail. 33 Those among the people who have discernment will cause the rest of the people to understand what is happening; nevertheless, for a while they will fall victim to sword, fire, exile and pillage. 34 When they stumble, they will receive a little help, although many who join them will be insincere. 35 Even some of those with discernment will stumble, so that some of them will be refined, purified and cleansed for an end yet to come at the designated time.
__________________________________
We’re working through a long 3 chapter prophecy, with chapters 10 through 12 all being collectively one vision and interpretation. This makes it difficult to draw big picture conclusions as we go through, due to the fact that we do not yet have the whole vision and interpretation in front of us. As a result, when we go through the verses in the commentaries, we’ll have to keep in mind previous posts and keep in mind that there remains more to learn.
That said, the verses here are significant in particular. This is where we see the now prophetically famous “abomination that makes desolation” phrase used. If you’re a Christian reading this text, you might know that the phrase is later used by Jesus.
Matthew 24:15 “So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let the one who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house, 18 and let the one who is in the field not turn back to take his cloak. 19 And alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! 20 Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. 22 And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.
It’s thus worth considering that Jesus spoke these words to a Jewish audience (who were familiar with Daniel) and the implication was either 1) the ‘abomination of desolation’ spoken of by Daniel had not yet happened, or 2) that it has already happened and that it would happen again.
If there was a universal belief that Daniel’s words were fully fulfilled, then this would have been a very strange comment from Jesus.
At the timeappointed he shall return, and come toward the south; but it shall not be as the former, or as the latter. The LXX. does not differ from this materially, save that it has Egypt, as usual, for south, and asserts that the king of the north entered Egypt. Theodotion is also in practical agreement with the Massoretic text. The Peshitta is much shorter, and differs very much from the above, as well as from all the other versions, “And he shall do in the former and in the latter.” There seems to have been something omitted, The Vulgate gives a different rendering of the last clause, “The last shall not be like the former.” The reference is to the second expedition of Antiochus into Egypt. His two nephews, whose quarrels and rivalries he had hoped to utilize for his own purposes, were now to appearance reconciled; they agreed to a joint occupation of the throne. It is supposed this second expedition was intended, if possible, to break up this agreement.
The verses here give a 2nd century BC explanation of the verses. The note from Ellicott below agrees with TPC regarding the historical event discussed:
(29) At the time appointed—i.e., in God’s own time. According to 1Ma. 1:29, it was after two years were fully expired since his return to Syria that Antiochus made another attack upon Jerusalem. This attack was made after his return from Egypt.
But it shall not be.—No such success attended him at the latter as at the former invasion.
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. As the LXX. do not obscure the reference to Egypt, so they here call the ships of Chittim Ρ̓ομαῖοι. The rendering is, “And the Romans shall come, and shall drive him out, and shall make him wroth, and he shall return and be enraged against the covenant of the holy, and shall do and return and plot against those on account of whom they left the covenant of the holy.” Theodotion renders in a slightly different way, “Those who come from Chittim shall assail, and he shall be humiliated, and he shall return and be enraged against the covenants of the holy. And he shall do and return, and have understanding against those who have been left to the holy covenant.” The Peshitta renders more in harmony with the Massoretic text, “Those who come against them from the lines of Chittim, even they shall break him, and he shall turn and be enraged against the holy covenant, and shall have understanding with them that forsake the holy covenant.” The rendering of the Vulgate is singular, “And there shall come against him trieres (ships of war, τριηρεῖς) and Romans, and he shall be, beaten, and shall return, and shall be enraged against the testament (testamentum,covenant) of the holy place and shall do, he shall even return and shall devise against those who have left the testament (testamebtum)of the holy place.” The ships of Chittim are the Roman ships, bearing the envoys of the Senate with C. Popilius Laenas at their head. He delivered to Anti,bus the tablets on which were inscribed the wishes of the Senate. Antiochus was then on the eve of commencing the siege of Alexandria, and completing the conquest of Egypt. Having read that the Senate of Rome desired him to refrain from attacking the allies of the Republic, Antiochus said he would answer after con-suiting with his friends. Lsenas drew a circle round him with his staff on the sand, and demanded that he should give his answer before he left the circle. Antiochus had to submit. Shall have indignation against the holy covenant. It is not certain whether Antiochus was present personally at the plunder of Jerusalem or superintended the massacre of the Jews; but it is practically certain that at this time began the systematic attempt to put down Judaism. And have intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant. It is not improbable that Antiochus was encouraged to make the attempt he did, by the fact that so many persons high in position were Hellenizers (1 Macc. 1:11-15, in which there is reference to those that forsook the holy covenant). The desire of Antiochus was probably to make his empire more homogeneous. The Jews, he would see by the fact that they had a national unity apart from his empire, might at times be thorns in his side—might become allies of Rome if he were compelled to engage in war with the Republic. It was their religion that was the bond which united the nation; let that be broken, then there would be a chance of the Jews blending harmoniously with the other races that made up the Syrian Empire. Those that forsook the holy covenant made him think it an easy task.
Ellicott continues to show agreement:
(30) Ships of Chittim.—On Chittim, see Genesis 10:4; comp. Numbers 24:24. The LXX. explain this of the Romans, referring to the story in Livy, xlv. 11.
He shall be grieved.—Literally, he shall lose heart. Compare the words of Livy, which describe the feelings of Antiochus at the peremptory demands of Popilius: “Obstupefactus tam violento imperio.” Theodotion apparently imagined that the Cyprians came as allies to the aid of Antiochus.
Return.—That is, to Palestine, where he will indulge his anger.
Have intelligence—i.e., pay attention to them. These persons are such as those who are mentioned in 1Ma. 1:11-16, who were anxious to Hellenise all their institutions, not only forsaking the outward sign of the covenant, but actually taking Greek names.
On the manner in which Antiochus treated the apostates, see 2Ma. 4:14, &c., and comp. Daniel 11:39.
So the view here is that these events detail an event that has already happened. So why is there some confusion on this point? We’ll investigate that further in verse 31, looking again at the commentary from TPC:
And arms shall stand on hie 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. The render* ing of the LXX. is close to the above, “Andarms shall stand by him, and shall pollute the sanctuary of fear “—probably the LXX. read מָגוֹר (magor),“fear,”instead of מעוז (ma‛oz),“fortress,”a change probably due to the fact that עsounded in Greek ears like וּ hard, Γάζαfor עָזָה—and they shall take away the sacrifice and place (δώσουσι give) the abomination of desolation.” Theodotion, from a mistaken vocalization, renders, “Andseeds “—reading זְרָעִים instead of זְרֹעִים—”shall spring up from him and shall pollute the sanctuary of power, and shall change the continual (sacrifice), and shall place (δώσουσι) the abomination of things that have disappeared (ἠφανισμένων).” The Peshitta is quite different in the firs; clause, “And their strong ones shall arise from them, and they pollute the sanctuary of strength, and they cause the sacrifice (qorban) to pass away, and they shall hang up the abomination in the temple.” The Vulgate rendering is in accordance generally with the Massoretic, “And arms shall stand from him. and shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall remove the continual (juge)sacrifice, and shall place the abomination of desolation.” Arms shall stand on his part. This word “arms” here is not to be understood as weapons—a misunderstanding possible in English. “Arms” here stands as the symbol of physical power generally. “On his part” is represented by the preposition מִן, which means “with” or “from;” hence we find the Septuagint translating by παρά, and Theodotion by ἐξ. Probably the most natural view is to take the preposition as equivalent to “by,” that is, he shall set physical forces in motion. And they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength. That the temple in Jerusalem had all the characteristics that fitted it to become a fortress, was proved in every one of the numerous sieges it has endured. It becomes still more a fortress, of course, when the Tower Antonia was erected overlooking the temple area. There may, however, have been a reference to the fact that the collectors of tribute sent by Antiochus fortified the city of David, and used it as a basis of operations from which to assail the temple and defile its courts with blood (1 Macc. 1:35-36). And take away the daily sacrifice. The Hebrew word here used means “continual,” and the substantive “sacrifice” is supplied. In Daniel 11:45 of the same chapter of 1 Macc. we are told that Antiochus forbade “burnt offerings, and sacrifices, and drink offerings in the temple.” And they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate. One must note here the source of δώσουσι which we find in both Greek versions, and dabit,which we find in the Vulgate. The Hebrew has וְנָתְנוּ (venath’noo),“and they shall give or set.” It seems to refer to an altar to Jupiter, which was erected on the brazen altar (1 Macc. 1:59). This altar is spoken of in verse 54 as the “abomination of desolation (βδέλυγμα ἐρημώσεως).” The Hebrew phrase has been borrowed from Daniel 9:27; hence the suggestion of Professor Bevan, to read here “בעלשׁיי, is not necessary
This is the verse wherein we cover “the abomination of desolation” – an event described both here and in the New Testament. If the NT describes it as a new event, could it be that the abomination of desolation might describe more than one thing? There’s a good argument for that. We’ll peak at the wiki page article covering the term:
In the 1st century, it was taken up by the authors of the gospels in the context of the Roman destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in the year 70, with the Gospel of Mark placing the “abomination of desolation” into a speech by Jesus concerning the Second Coming. It is widely accepted that Mark was the primary source used by the authors of the Gospel of Matthew and of Luke for their parallel passages, with Matthew 24:15–16 adding a reference to Daniel and Luke 21:20–21 describing the Roman armies (“But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies…”); in all three the authors likely had in mind a future eschatological (i.e., end-time) event, and perhaps the activities of some antichrist.
Coin of Antiochus IV: the inscription reads “King Antiochus, God manifest, bearer of victory”
Chapters 1–6 of the Book of Daniel originated as a collection of oral literature from Hellenistic Palestine in the late 4th to early 3rd centuries BCE. At that time, a lamb was sacrificed twice daily, in the morning and the evening, on the altar of the Temple in Jerusalem. In 167 BCE, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Seleucid emperor, who then ruled Palestine, ended the practice. In reaction to this, the visionary chapters of Daniel, chapters 7–12, were added to reassure Jews that they would survive in the face of this threat. In Daniel 8, one angel asks another how long “the transgression that makes desolate” will last. The Prophecy of Seventy Weeks (Daniel 9) tells of “the prince who is to come” who “shall make sacrifice and offering cease, and in their place shall be an abomination that desolates.” Daniel’s final vision appears in Daniel 11, where it tells the history of the arrogant foreign king who sets up the “abomination that makes desolate,”; and in Daniel 12, where the prophet is told how many days will pass “from the time that the regular burnt offering is taken away and the abomination that desolates is set up.”
One of the more popular older views was to see in the “abomination” a contemptuous deformation (or dysphemism) of the Canaanite deityBaalshamin “Lord of Heaven”; Philo of Byblosidentified Baalshamin with Zeus, and as the Temple was rededicated in honour of Zeus according to 2 Maccabees 6:2, older commentators tended to follow Porphyry of Tyre in seeing the “abomination” in terms of a statue of Zeus. More recently, it has been suggested that the reference is to baetyls, possibly of meteoric origin, that were fixed to the altar of sacrifice for worship, since the use of such stones is well-attested in Canaanite and Syrian cults. Both proposals have been criticized on the basis that they are too speculative, dependent on flawed analysis, or not well-suited to the relevant context in the Book of Daniel; and more recent scholarship tends to see the “abomination” as a reference to either the pagan offerings that replaced the forbidden twice-daily Jewish offering (cf. Daniel 11:31, 12:11; 2 Maccabees 6:5), or the pagan altar on which such offerings were made.
In 63 BCE, the Romans captured Jerusalem, and Judaea became a province of the Roman Empire. In 66 CE, the Jews rose in revolt in the First Jewish–Roman War. The war ended in 70 CE when the legions of the Roman general Titus surrounded and eventually captured Jerusalem; the city and the Temple were razed to the ground, and the only habitation on the site until the first third of the next century was a castrum. It was against this background that the gospels were written; the Gospel of Mark around 70 and Matthew and Luke around 80–85. The secular scholars believe that none of the authors were eyewitnesses to the life of Jesus, and that Mark was the source used by the authors of Matthew and Luke for their “abomination of desolation” passages.
Chapter 13 of the Gospel of Mark is a speech of Jesus concerning the return of the son of man and the advent of the Kingdom of God, which will be signalled by the appearance of the “abomination of desolation”. It begins with Jesus in the temple informing his disciples that “not one stone here will be left on another, all will be thrown down”; the disciples ask when this will happen, and in Mark 13:15, Jesus tells them: “[W]hen you see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains” Mark’s terminology is drawn from Daniel, but the author places the fulfilment of the prophecy in the coming days, underlining this in Mark 13:30 by stating that “this generation will not pass away before all these things take place.” While Daniel’s “abomination” was probably a pagan altar or sacrifice, Mark uses a masculine participle for “standing”, indicating a concrete historical person: several candidates have been suggested, but the most likely is Titus.
The majority of scholars believe that Mark was the source used by the authors of Matthew and Luke for their “abomination of desolation” passages. Matthew 24:15–16 follows Mark 13:14 closely: “So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains”; but unlike Mark, Matthew uses a neutral participle instead of a masculine one, and explicitly identifies Daniel as the text’s prophetic source. Luke 21:20–21 drops the “abomination” entirely: “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it.” In all three, the authors likely had in mind a future eschatological (i.e., end-time) event, and perhaps the activities of some antichrist.
This expression refers to the transgression of the Law of Moses by the Jews when they were being taken captive to Babylon. The graven image mentioned in the Old Testament is called a stele by ancient peoples, such as the Egyptians, and were usually funerary tablets that pagan peoples made for their gods.
God’s people were serving stelae (graven images) and serving other pagan gods such as the queen of heaven in the Babylonian captivity.
Both the prophets Daniel and Jesus warned the Israelites of their turning away from God and of the End Times, as in the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks, which is prophesied by the angel Gabriel of the coming of the Anti-Messiah, who after the 62 weeks would come to ravage humanity. There is also a meaning in esoteric occult circles, that the stele of Revelation, also known as the stele of Ankh-af-na-Khonsu, would be filled with prophecies of the Anti-Messiah, according to interpretations of the religion developed by Aleister Crowley, called Thelema.
According to the Bible in II Kings 23:13 and I Kings 11:5 one can find a close link between the concepts of idolatry and abomination.
In the circles of direct influence of the Book of Daniel, which are the same circles that gave rise to apocalyptic literature, the expression was used to designate an important eschatological conception. It is only in an eschatological sense that the expression can be adequately explained in the New Testament passages mentioned above.
According to most modern commentators, these passages are a “Jewish apocalypse”, which was reinterpreted by Christianity as a prophecy about the end times, when the Antichrist (abomination of desolation), will come to ravage the Earth and its inhabitants.
On the other hand, W. C. Allen maintains that the evangelists were referring to Caligula‘s desire to build a statue of himself in the Temple of Jerusalem
It’s important to remember when reading wikipedia that it will usually take a secular line on a lot of issues. That’s fine provided we know that the bias is there. What the article here does not mention is the ancient tradition that Christians fled Jerusalem at the time when it was surrounded by the Roman armies because Christians were acting on the sermon and advice given by Jesus in the New Testament passages:
Map of the Decapolis with Jerusalem and Pella visible.Remnants of Pella.
The authenticity of this tradition has been a much debated question since 1951 when S. G. F. Brandon in his work The Fall of Jerusalem and the Christian Church argued that the Christians would have been allied to their compatriots, the Zealots; only after the destruction of the Jewish community would Christianity have emerged as a universalist religion. The Christian–Zealot alliance has hardly been taken seriously, but the historicity of the flight to Pella has been controversial ever since.
Ancient sources
The whole body, however, of the Church at Jerusalem, having been commanded by a divine revelation given to men of approved piety there before the war, removed from the city to a certain town beyond the Jordan called Pella. Here, those who believed in Christ removed from Jerusalem as if holy men had abandoned the royal city itself and the whole land of Judea.
This heresy of the Nazoraeans exists in Beroea in the neighbourhood of Coele Syria and the Decapolis in the region of Pella and in Basanitis in the so-called Kokaba (Chochabe in Hebrew). From there it took its beginning after the exodus from Jerusalem when all the disciples went to live in Pella because Christ had told them to leave Jerusalem and to go away since it would undergo a siege. Because of this advice they lived in Perea after having moved to that place, as I said.
For after all those who believed in Christ had generally come to live in Perea, in a city called Pella of the Decapolis of which it is written in the Gospel that it is situated in the neighbourhood of the region of Batanaea and Basanitis, Ebion’s preaching originated here after they had moved to this place and had lived there.
— Epiphanius, Panarion 30, 2, 7
So Aquila, while he was in Jerusalem, also saw the disciples of the disciples of the apostles flourishing in the faith and working great signs, healings, and other miracles. For they were such as had come back from the city of Pella to Jerusalem and were living there and teaching. For when the city was about to be taken and destroyed by the Romans, it was revealed in advance to all the disciples by an angel of God that they should remove from the city, as it was going to be completely destroyed. They sojourned as emigrants in Pella, the city above mentioned in Transjordania. And this city is said to be of the Decapolis.
— Epiphanius, On Weights and Measures 15
The early Apostolic Christians were well aware of Jesus‘ prophecy in Matthew 24 and Luke 21 regarding the abomination of desolation, the surrounding of Jerusalem by the Roman Army, prior to its destruction. The army mysteriously retreated, which showed the Christians the sign they were looking for to escape to Pella, before the Romans returned to destroy the city:
Matthew 24:15-20 KJV:
[15] When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) [16] then let them which be in Judæa flee into the mountains: [17] let him which is on the house top not come down to take any thing out of his house: [18] neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. [19] And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! [20] But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
Luke cites the same exposition, making clear that Jesus is prophetically referring to the Roman Army, surrounding, departure and return:
Luke 21:20-24 KJV:
[20] And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. [21] Then let them which are in Judæa flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. [22] For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. [23] But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. [24] And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
In chapter 10 of his book on the Apostolic Christian 7th Day Sabbath: History of the Sabbath, J. N. Andrews cites the historians, including Josephus, that verify the departure of the Christians whilst the Romans are mysteriously departing, noting that the Jewish forces hounding the Roman army were therefore too busy to prevent the Christians escaping to Pella.
It’s interesting that despite having an entire article on the flight to Pella, on its site, the flight is not mentioned at all in the Abomination of Desolation wiki article. Sometimes with publicly available information, you need to do a little bit of digging.
There are also some legitimate arguments that the accepted dating of the Gospels is not early enough. For example, here is an argument that the Gospel of Matthew pre-dates the fall of the Temple. You’ll see in the video that the argument for the later dating isn’t as definitive as some would have you believe:
It is important to give an ear to secular arguments, but you don’t have to treat those arguments as fully authoritative. Academia has its own biases (and generally in the last 300 years, those biases are hostile to traditional Christianity.)
Why did I take that entire side trail? If the New Testament accounts were written / invented *after* the fall of Jerusalem, then how do you explain a Flight to Pella that happened before the fall? What warning were the early Christians heeding? On the other hand, if Jesus gave the warning before the fall of the temple, then it’s both a fulfilled prophecy AND a strong argument that a prophecy can in some cases (as the one here in Daniel) be fulfilled more than once.
Combing the two wiki shared articles, I think we can argue that if there was a first abomination of desolation in the 2nd century BC, then it appears a second one arguably occurred in the 1st century AD. A lot of people in Christian eschatology circles argue that a 3rd Abomination of Desolation will occur in and around the time of the 2nd Coming of Jesus.
Of course, a 3rd Abomination of Desolation seems to require a 3rd Temple. If you see Christians advocating for, or celebrating the imminent construction of a physical building 3rd Temple in Jerusalem, then they are essentially advocating for the arrival of the Antichrist. As many of you reading this are undoubtedly aware, this is actively occurring RIGHT NOW. Some Christians in the United States are working hard to provide a proper temple construction precursor sacrifice for Jewish groups in Israel. Some have said that this sacrifice has already happened within the last few months. The “red heifer” sacrifice topic in the news in recent months, is what this is about.
Alternatively, though, it is Christian teaching that the bodies of Christians are the new temple of the Holy Spirit. When Christ said the temple would be torn down and raised up in three days, He was referring to His own body. Christian theology teaches that God the Holy Spirit indwells within believers. It might be that a 3rd abomination refers not to a building in Jerusalem, but instead to to some type of End Times apostasy within the Church. (Ex: Can you be indwelt by the Holy Spirit if you get a brain implant that effects your ability to operate with free will?)
I guess we’ll have to wait and see what all of this looks like when it happens – though I am not in the camp that is so eager to see the return of Jesus that I am hoping for the imminent arrival of a global tribulation and antichrist. Unfortunately, a lot of people *are* in that camp.
Let’s jump back into the commentary notes again for verses 32 through 35, where the focus there will be primarily on the 2nd century BC. From TPC:
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. The LXX. translates, “And by sins of the covenant shall they defile themselves with a hard people, and the people knowing these things shall have the mastery and do (exploits).” The , the preformative of the participle hiphil, has been taken for the preposition מִן. written defectively, and probably בִּלְ אֹם קָשֵׁה for בַּחֲלַקֹת. Theodotion does not require special notice, as his version here agrees closely with the Massoretic. The Peshitta is somewhat shorter and having a different significance, “And those who transgress against the covenant he shall condemn them. And the people who know the fear shall be strong.” The Vulgate rendering is, “And the impious against the covenant shall feign falsely (simulabunt fraudulenter), but the people knowing their God shall possess and do (exploits).” Men like Alcimus, the high priest after Menelaus, were transgressors of the sacred covenant, and were corrupted by the flatteries of Epiphanes. He used them to gain the people over to his views. But the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits. Even when Epiphanes seemed most nearly successful, there was a deep-seated opposition to this Hellenizing process. Especially prominent were those who were zealous for the Law, the Hasidim,or, to give them the name they have in the Book of Maccabees, the Assidseans. These religionists, headed by Mattathias and his sons, especially by the heroic Judas Maccabaeus, certainly knew their God, and as certainly did 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. The LXX. rendering is, “The prudent of the people shall understand in multitudes (εἰς πολλούς),and they shall push against them with the sword, and shall grow old with it (παλαιωθήσονται ἐν αὐτῇ).“We should feel inclined to read ἐπάλαισαν,had Paulus Tellensis not read as the text, “And by bondage and by plunder of days they shall be disgraced.” The mysterious clause, “shall grow old with it,” is due to the translation of שְׁבִי(shevee), “captivity,”as if it had been שִׂיבָה (seebah), “old age.” Theodotion is obscure also, “The understanding of the people shall understand in regard to many things, and they shall suffer (ἀσθενήσουσιν) by the sword, and with fire, and by captivity, and in plunder of days.” The Peshitta renders, “The dispersed of the people shall instruct many, and they shall fall by the sword, and by fire, by captivity, and by spoil, a thousand days.” The Vulgate does not supply any point worthy of remark. And they that understand amongthe people shall instruct many. In 1 Macc. 2:27 we have an account of a multitude instructed in the Law and determined to keep it, who, with their wives, children, and cattle, retired into the desert. Yet they shall fall by the sword, etc. After the multitude pursued the army of King Antiochus, which was at Jerusalem, and overtook them, the fugitives would not submit to sacrifice to idols. The army assailed them on the sabbath day; from a superstitious reverence for the clay of rest, they did not even defend themselves, and therefore fell an easy prey to their enemies (1 Macc. 2:38, “They slew them with their wives, and children, and their cattle to the number of a thousand people”). While we would not be held as regarding as literally historical the sufferings of Eleazar and the seven brethren and their mother, as related in 2 Marc. 6. and 7; and more fully in 4 Maccabees, yet it can only have been an exaggeration of what must have actually occurred.
Setting aside the argument of whether the verses refer to more than one event simultaneously, the 2nd century BC interpretation of these verses is relatively well agreed upon. It’s also worth noting that this is why the dating of Daniel is so important to so many people. Even if you attribute the entirety of the events described to the 2nd century BC and nothing after, a 6th century BC dating of Daniel means that Daniel *nailed* a prophecy four hundred years ahead of time. The level of accuracy is the largest argument in favor of Daniel’s later dating. But as we’ve established in previous posts, there are actually a lot of reasons to believe in the earlier dating of the text. If the text is both very accurate, and four hundred years ahead of its fulfillment, then Daniel is a profound proof of the existence of the supernatural.
We’ll finish this section of verses by looking at the commentary notes from Ellicott:
(34) Now when they shall fall.—Referring to those who suffer during this persecution, to whichever class they belong. (See last Note). These will not be entirely without help, but there will be some small assistance given them. It will be small, either compared with their present needs, or contrasted with the great help which will be given them when the tribulation attains its greatest severity. In the Maccabee persecutions help was given to the sufferers by Judas and his brethren (1MMalachi 3:11, &c., 1Ma. 4:14, &c.). This prevented the faithful from disappearing entirely.
Many shall cleave. . . .—Dissimulation will cause some to declare themselves upon the side of “those that understand.” This is a feature which will be noticed in religious persecutions; according as one party or the other gains in power, as its prospects brighten, it gains fresh adherents. This held true in the days of Antiochus. (See 1Ma. 6:21, &c., 9:23.)
(35) Some of them.—The reason of this persecution is revealed. Whilst in Daniel 11:33 it appears that the sufferings of “those that understand” would instruct others, it appears that they would themselves profit by their sufferings. These gradations are mentioned (1) “to try “—i.e., to refine, as a precious metal is refined by fire; (2) “to purge “—i.e., to separate the bad from the good; (3) “to make white”—i.e., to cause them to become completely purified. (Comp. Psalms 51:7; Isaiah 1:18). In this way the dissemblers are made known. The patient example of the sufferers is followed by others who are faithful, while the “flatterers” become open apostates.
The note for verse 35 presents some profound – albeit difficult – truth. It is difficult to embrace suffering as a means for betterment or benefit. Yet it is often the case. Is the difficulty a reason to reject the nature of the world (or at least the world as it is now?) I don’t believe so. It is important, in my opinion, not to be too proud in declaring how things should be that we reject how things are. Rejecting reality for a delusion isn’t profitable. We are not God. Often it is through suffering that we must re-learn that we are not God. Only God is God.
