joelstrumpet

I am finishing a study with members of a church in VA. I received alot of deer in the headlight looks, but thankfully it was apparent something 'clicked' for others.

To help provoke them into reading Gods word I wrote a brief recap to help clarify a few points brought in class. You'll note grammar, spelling and other stuff that would indicate I didn't write it. Well you're right my wife helps out in that department . Im the idea guy my wife helps with getting it on paper. The great thing about this opportunity is I hope to have Joels DVD for icing on the cake.

Of course it was written to the class so unless you were there it may seem brief, as I intended for them. Anyways here what we wrote, a recap of last Sundays class I look forward to your constructive criticism.

Thank you for allowing me to discuss the book of Daniel with you on such short notice. I want to briefly clarify a few points that we talked about last Sunday.

When we read Daniel chapter 2 we discovered several things, what the king had dreamed and Gods interpretation of the dream. The dream and the interpretation were revealed to Daniel after he and his companions inquired of God. Daniel explained both dream and the interpretation to king Nebuchad-nezzer.

If we follow along what is written we should find ourselves concerned with the fourth kingdom as it was given the greatest detail and is yet to be fulfilled. From God’s interpretation of the image we’re able to discern at least two things about it.

1. Its nature; strength of iron, yet being fragile and divided. “And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron, inasmuch as iron breaks in pieces and shatters everything; and like iron that crushes, that kingdom will break in pieces and crush all the others. Whereas you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; yet the strength of the iron shall be in it, just as you saw the iron mixed with ceramic clay. And the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile. As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay.” Daniel 2: 40-43

2. The time of its existence, being when Messiah returns. “And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.” Daniel 2: 44

Many have construed the word “divided” to mean an arithmetical division of the fourth kingdom. But simple math dogmatically proves one part being equally divided leave us with two parts. I must remind you God specifically numbered them 1 thru 4, knowing this we are compelled to look elsewhere for an answer. Thankfully, we have scriptural support that best describes a divided kingdom.

And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: (Mathew 12:25).

We find similar examples concerning ‘divided kingdoms’ in Mathew 12:26, 27, 35; Mark 3:24, 25, 26 and Luke 11:17, 18; 12:52. Webster’s 1828 dictionary defines division of this nature as one of disunion; discord; variance; difference. So, unless there is in the kingdom like minded people abiding in one doctrine it will invariably come to an end and be destroyed.

I have been taught by some the 4th kingdom is Rome. But there is nothing in scripture to indicate this. The Roman Empire no longer exists, it is a thing of the past and scripturally we’ve learned the last kingdom will not return but be brought to desolation. God never names the 4th kingdom so the question must be asked, “By whose authority do those who say it is Roman add to what God Himself has already interpreted?” That question alone should cause us to look to scripture for an answer and not a commentary. In later chapters of Daniel, Ezekiel and Revelation we can pretty much pin point this location. In chapter two some insight is gained into the general location of the 4th kingdom, by the very thoughts king Nebuchad-nezzer had on his mind before he went to bed.

As for thee, O king, thy thoughts came into thy mind upon thy bed, what should come to pass hereafter: and he that revealeth secrets maketh known to thee what shall come to pass. (Daniel 2:29)

Think about it, king Nebuchad-nezzar had been given a kingdom. What king after would not think to ask the question what will happen after I am gone? What will become of my kingdom in latter days? Well lo’ and behold God gave him an answer in a dream. Nebuchad-nezzer’s kingdom was located is Babylon (Gold), it was then given to the Madai-Persian king (silver), later to Alexander (bronze), and finally to the fourth kingdom (iron and clay) that will come to occupy Babylon. Thus we have a clue that the 4th kingdom will have a presence in the Middle East.

Now I have a question for you history buffs. Did Rome ever occupy Babylon?

There also seemed to be an issue regarding when God establishes His Kingdom on earth and rules from the Throne of David. To help clarify the time frame of when this happens, it comes AFTER what is known as ‘Daniels 70th week’ or ‘the last week in Daniel’ in during which time the 4th kingdom reigns. To keep it short and much to the point, from the time the order went out to rebuild Jerusalem, to when it was restored is 7 weeks (49 years). From the time Jerusalem was restored to Messiah the Prince (when Christ was rejected) is 62 weeks (434 years) for a grand total of 69 weeks (7+ 62=69 weeks). Now it appears the great clock has stopped as the 70th week has yet to arrive. I contend the gap in time between the 69th and 70th week is Gods patience made manifest.

The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. (2Peter 3:9).

The 70th week (7 years) will start the day Anti-Christ (a.k.a. The King of the North, Abaddon, and the Desolator) makes a covenant with many, and so the clock begins again. This covenant will last 1260 days (3.5 years) during which time it is thought the Temple will be rebuilt and they will cry peace and safety, peace and safety! But in the middle of the week the king of the north breaks the covenant. Causes sacrifice and oblation to cease and the overspreading abomination of desolation thus beginning Great Tribulation lasting for an additional 1260 days after which the 70th week ends.
Reading from Mathew 24:29 we find certain events happening immediately after the tribulation, We see God pouring out His wrath and His second coming. It is only after this, the reign of the Gentile kingdoms will come to an end, never again to trodden down Jerusalem as the God of Israel will have established His Kingdom which will last forever.

And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. (Daniel 7:14)

I could go on ironing out the timeline of these events and I’d be happy to do so at a later date, in essence I want to show people where to look so that they will not be caught unawares. We need to be “Semper Gumby” (always flexible) for if we look too long in one place it will cause us to become complacent, stiff and lowers our guard. Being watchful is a continuous activity, an action which requires more than standing around waiting for something to happen.

Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.

Hello David, interesting post. I am considering a point or two in it. I have posted below, what I posted on the Mystery Babylon topic, and on Joel's website concerning the RCC/Islam paradigms. It is written for other purposes so the language may say you - but it's someone else.

It concerns the breakdown of chapter 2. Perhaps there's a point or two here for you as well. JB

***

As you know, I believe in the Islamic Paradigm but I do not believe the various verses show it arising the way you suggest.

In your view, it leaves out the West and has difficulty explaining certain word nuances in the chapters you quoted above - esp in Chapter 2. I feel that your paradigm uses some of the same semantic habits - that the RCC paradigm has historically used.

The divergence I have is here. (I’m using Young’s literal Translation)

In chapter 2 - the word “hereafter” is used. That is the foundation of what the statue vision is. “The great God has shown you what is to be hereafter”.

28- “that which [is] to be in the latter end of the days”
29 - “that which [is] to be after this, and the Revealer of secrets hath caused thee to know that which [is] to be.

(That seems to suggest a continuing completeness of time)

More importantly, Daniel clearly states what is required to be a “Metal” by stating what Nebuchadnezzar’s metal was.

38 “and whithersoever sons of men are dwelling, the beast of the field, and the fowl of the heavens, He hath given into thy hand, and hath caused thee to rule over them all; thou [art] this head of gold.”

So then, “rule over them all” is the preeminent qualifier. Daniel is not talking about Babylon ruling over the Medes or Persians or Greeks. He is talking about Babylon ruling as a WORLD EMPIRE and “THAT” is the idea carried forward. And again Daniel makes the point when he talks about the 2nd AND the 3rd empires,

39 “And after thee doth rise up another kingdom lower than those, and another third kingdom of brass, that doth rule overall the earth.”

“that doth rule over the earth.”

At this point, we also learn about SUCCESSION of empires ruling over the earth - because Daniel inserts the words “after thee.”

We know there was no succession of empires after Nebuchadnezzar personally, but after his grandson. So Daniel is saying “after you” AFTER your empire, the next to bear rule over the whole earth will be a 2nd and a third.

So what is the determining factor as to what “bear rule over the whole earth” is?

You say it is having rule over Babylon. But Daniel does not say that. The determining factor here is “bear rule over the whole earth.” Not bear rule over Babylon - (which your view has to surmise from v 40 - and correlate from other chapters)

Does that mean each successive empire MUST absorb the other? Literally? Not in my mind - because the bear rule over the whole earth “IS” the driver not absorption (which up until this point hasn’t been discussed at all).

At Alexander’s death - the empire was divided - and so it can not be said the Grecian Empire literally ruled Babylon - unless 7 years qualifies (330-323BC).

It’s symbolic at the least. (The same symbolic way Rome ruled over Babylon in it’s day - by ruling over the earth)

The Seluceid did rule over Babylon - but they weren’t taking orders from Greece. They were their own Empire. The other 3 Grecian divisions were each ruling over something else - as their own empires.

So Grecian Beast/Brass “as a whole” is not one continuous Empire per se - but it was the various Greek sub divisions having nothing in common except language and history. THAT is what bore rule over the whole earth. This is terribly important as we will find this same concept in the Roman (4th) one as well.

So then, when did the Grecian Beast empire fall? At Alexander’s death? No, not really. It divided, and later, elements of the division fell to Rome - and that is what made Rome rule over the whole earth. By eliminating Grecian divisions as power centers. This, Rome clearly did. Otherwise one has to explain the destruction of the Grecian empire in another way. You do this through the Babylon absorption view - by an empire still future and disconnected; not even bearing rule over the earth - and the qualifiers above prevent that view.

So your point rests entirely on your strained interpretation of…

v40 And the fourth kingdom (that shall bear rule over the whole earth) is strong as iron, because that iron is breaking small, and making feeble, all [things], even as iron that is breaking all these, it beateth small and breaketh. (Young’s)

“beateth small and breaketh” or “breaketh and bruise” KJV

I don’t see absorption there and the only place it can be inferred is in the clause “breaking all these” - but regardless - it can not be shown that any empire after Greece - bore rule over the whole earth except Rome. (Even if the idea of succession is wrong.)

It is a giant leap to make the whole theory rest on this verse as to whether or not each empire must completely absorb the other. I know you said that the verses were repeated - seemingly to mean that Daniel was making a very important point - but if you read the entire chapter - you will see he also duplicates other points several times .

And even if that were correct - would it not make world rule more correct - seeing how he says it 4 times?

So what does all that mean? It means that your view as to what the IRON is - rests on the correct interpretation of verse 40 - pure and simple. It further means that if that view is wrong - then the explanation of v41

“the (4th)kingdom will be divided” is also wrong.

Why is that important? Well, we know the Grecian Empire was divided into 4 territories. But Daniel does not say that it was. (Not here in chapter 2)

However, Daniel says the 4th empire IS divided. Something, must be very different about the 4th empire’s division as opposed to the 3rd’s. That’s why he points it out. The difference is that the 3rd empire’s division had no bearing on whether it did nor did not rule over the whole earth. However, when it comes to the 4th - it does.

So the “division” of the 4th Empire MUST mean something else - compared to the division of the 3rd Empire.

Rule over the earth - in succession - and continuation is the only view which satisfies this.

Absorption of Babylon falls apart here too.

So again, continuation of one empire after the other, bearing rule over the earth, showing Nebuchadnezzar the entire historical view, until the STONE comes, is the correct view.

The 4th empire bearing world rule was Rome - which later divided and stayed divided - but even in it’s division - bore rule over the earth (like Greece) until the Stone came. No other Empire would bear rule over the earth, until the STONE.

From later chapters and detail - we learn that the AC empire comes up out of the Eastern half of the 4th empire - in exactly all the ways you suggest in your studies. (it still comes up - and it still produces the AC)

If this view is correct - it leaves us with the Western half and the Eastern half of the world intact - from the time of Rome - and the world drawn into an irrevocable East/West conflict, which we clearly see about us - and know the terrible end of.

This East/West conflict has lasted from the division of the Roman Empire to this very day - in many various forms.

Therefore, the RCC view, and the Islamic Babylon view are BOTH correct in a certain way - and that is why they have a hard time reconciling to each other. Each is seeing what they want to see - but they are both seeing truth - which can only be explained in a synthesis of both views.

And this is not Odd.

Martin Luther for different reasons, believed Antichrist was both the Papacy AND Mohammedanism - as did others throughout history - even though they did not see the East West duality this way - since they were inside the Western half. They saw themselves only as Righteous Protestant Christians - between the 2 evils of Papacy and Mohamedism - not Westerners.

jb

At this point it’s very relevant to point out that the RCC paradigm did not begin with the European Union. The EU was merely seen as the latest fulfillment of a much earlier view. That earlier view came about in order to explain Babylon sitting on 7 hills in Revelation 17. Babylon sitting on 7 hills as the Papacy - had it’s foundation in Luther’s Magisterial Reformation. Even so - Luther (among others) included Mohamedism as part of his Antichrist view.

So, the view has held for 500 years because there is/was an element of truth. (long before the EU).

Rev 17/18 therefore - in my view - shows the West as Babylon sitting on 7 hills - and the East as the Beast. West riding the East - until the East turns on her and burns her with fire.

Babylon’s singular feature in Rev - is that she is a massive consumer commercial thing - which is dependent on the Beast - until the 10 give their power to the AC.

Revelation 17 shows us the full blown end time world.

The question arises - what does the West have to do with Babylon? It is a type. And that is by no means a reach. The cities of the plains had been around 1000 years before the Babylonian Empire. Egypt had ruled the world before Babylon and so had Assyria. But it was the specifics of Babylon that Daniel was pointing out. That in the very last days, the world will be divided into East and West - and EACH HALF - would resemble Babylon in different ways.

Thus the harmony - and the division - in attempting to reconcile these two views.

David,

Read Rome equals greece and tell me what you think?

I don't think Rome has anything to do with what is written in Daniel's account of the image and beast kingdom dreams. From what I have read king Nebuchad-nezzar asked (Daniel 2:29) what will happen in latter days?. I believe that question is in regard to his kingdom for we read in later chapters his kingdom in particular being given over to others.

I will agree Rome did step into Syria and controlled certain portions of land bordering the Great Sea. But it never did occupy the entire kingdom of Nebuchad-nezzar a.k.a. the land of the Chaldeans. Saying Rome did would be like saying we should now call the United States Cuba because Raul conquered south Florida

What I gain from Daniel, it begins with the image or "big picture' so to speak. Whether the 4th kingdom is described as part of the image or a beast it is the same. Reading thru Daniel greater and greater detailed information regarding the fourth kingdom it is gained. Until in chapter 11 I read what seems to fill in the time between the third and fourth kingdoms described elsewhere in Daniel. Begininng with with the defeat of Cyrus by Alexander both of which occupied the physical kingdom Babylon. Then from the division of the Greek empire certain kings known as the king of the north I believe are the ones ruling over "the land of the Chaldeans" (Ezekiel 12:13) up until the vile one spoken of in verse 21 which rules over the 4th spoken of in image and beast visions, after which comes Christ's return.

The kings of the north before the one spoken of in verse 21 are for lack of better words 'lessor' kings of the north which I contend ruled Nebuchad-nezzar's old kingdom between the time the Greek empire awas divided and Anti-Christ (v21). In fact when I count those kings of the north in chapter 11 I'm certain there are 4 separate ones spoken of and quite possibly a 5th but Im still working on that. If there are five recorded then those five plus the Greek, Madai-Persian and Babylon would equal eight which may also explain Revlation 17. Yet on the same token if one can only count four we could also argue then there are seven the eight being of the seventh. But hey thats another day and just me taking a shot in the dark as well

As I told the class we shouldn't overly concern ourselves with the past. I think its fun looking into these things and Ive learned more here at Joels than any other time in my life. But look where God draws your attention too when you read Daniel it is the fourth kingdom the one yet to be fulfilled. I'm certain we can all agree what we see today fits what Christ specifically warned us of.

Go out and warn others, not to stir up panic but to encourage one another to be watchful. Keep those lamps filled with oil!

I tend to think the book of Daniel stems from a particular question a king had before he went nighty nite. I've been kicking this around for a few days now.

1st Babylon
2nd Madai-Persians
3rd Greek
4th king of the north (Daniel 11:4-8 )???????????
5th king of the north (Daniel 11:4-8 )???????????
6th king of the north (Daniel 11:9-19)
7th king of the north (Daniel 11:20)
8th king of the north (Daniel 11:21-45). Verse 21 start 70th week, verse 29 marks the mid-week, verse 45 end of the 70th week.

The question for me still remains whether there are 2 different kings of the north spoken of between verses 4-8 or just 1. If two then it may be helpful with regard to Revelation 17. Interesting too is the similarity of the 7th in that they are only around for a short time.

Also the city of Tyre, according to the maps I have, fall within the bounds of the land of the Chaldeans.

bump

Hi David,

8th king of the north (Daniel 11:21-45). Verse 21 start 70th week, verse 29 marks the mid-week, verse 45 end of the 70th week

Yes verses 11:21 thru 11:45 speak of only one man and it is the AC. We know from Dan 9 that his career spans the entire 70th week. The covenant he confirms begins the last 7 years. We know this covenant is broken at the midpoint of the last 7 years from Dan 9:27.

Dan 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.

11:31 is the AOD Jesus talks about in Matt 24 and the one Dan refers to in 9:27. So we know this verse occurs at the midpoint of the last 7 years. All the verses before it up to 11:21 are before the midpoint and those following it are after the midpoint. The resurrection is shown in Dan 12:1-2.

Dan 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
Dan 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

At that time is the time just spoken of in Dan 11 which is the end of the AC's life as well as the end of the last 7 years because we see the resurrection. Dan 11 actually provides us with the most details that we have on the military exploits of the AC.

Dan 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.
Dan 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.

He comes in peacefully and the prince of the covenant is mentioned. Covenant obviously reminds me of Dan 9:27.

Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Dan 11:23 And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people.
Dan 11:24 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, even for a time.

The word league and covenant mean virtually the same thing. I get this sense of a false peace treaty here matching breaking a covenant. Then for some reason he gets angry with Israel in the middle of this battle with the king of the south (Egypt).

Dan 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.
Dan 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.

The end is not yet and his heart is against the holy covenant. He falls in Israel with no one to help him.

Dan 11:45 And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.

And then we see the resurrection in Dan 12. I believe we have a picture of the entire last 7 years here in Dan 11:21-45. That is why I have been monitoring Egyptian and Turkish relations. They represent the regions known as the kings of the north and south from the research I have done anyway. I have no clue who any of the other kings are in Dan 11 though. The last one can be timestamped as well as the first (showing Greek 4 way division Dan 11:4). Who the others are I don't know for certain.

Peace,
Seeker

Hi Seeker

I know you like to do research into things pertaining to the scripture and how they were fulfilled. God listed these kings of Ptolmey and Selsucus one by one in order of when they ruled. Each time it switches to the next kings of south and north the prophecy tells the events this or that king will be famous for. Things that were recorded in history.

With the theory that you are showing here.... you have taken the events, and the order in the line of kings, that belongs to Antiochus IV and applied them to a future AC. You have actually trucated the line of the Seleucus dynasty and excluded the most famous of all the Seleucid kings.

If you look up the history of the kings of the North and south and their battles over the many generations you will see what I mean. Back when I did it I only had some old Funk and Wagnal Encyclopedias (pre-internet) but all the info was there. But now it should be easy to do.


God bless
Norma

Likewise, I have no clue who, as I call them, the 'lessor kings' are either. I've tried to ID them but when I got into it so many historical kings could fit the only brief descriptions given in Daniel.

I'll say one thing though it sure does focus your attention to a particular region.

hummmm...then maybe it was easier in my day pre-internet. Maybe too much information makes it harder.

I've tried to ID them but when I got into it so many historical kings could fit the only brief descriptions given in Daniel.

What makes it a little bit easier is that God gave the prophecy in the order that the kings would rule. So if you match up datres for the kings of the North and south, and who suceeded who then you will find that God gave the exact clues (descriptions) needed to further indentify each of them.

I'll give you my list of Seleucid kings along with the text. I used to have all the kings from the Ptolemy dynasty on here too but it was so big people didn't want to read it.


---------------------
The kingdom of Babylon was taken over by the Media-Persians who took possession of the kingdom and ruled over Israel from Babylon.

Dan 10:1
In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel,

.559-530 BC: Cyrus II The Great, first king of Persia, (ends 70 year excile of the Jews)

. Dan. 11: 2
And now I will tell you the truth. Behold, three more kings are going to arise in Persia.

530-521 BC: Reign of Artaxerxes (Ahasuerus in Hebrew), Cambyses II
522-522 BC: There was a usurper for 10 months in 522. He faked being Smerdis, Cyrus' son, who had been killed.
522-485 BC: Reign of Darius I, the Great

. Dan. 11: 2 continues
Then a fourth will gain more riches than them all; as soon as he becomes strong through his riches, he will arouse the whole Empire of Greece.

485-465 BC: Reign of Xerxes I, Invaded Greece in 480 BC

In my Opinion the remaining Persin kings, until the fall of the Empire, are not listed by God in this prophecy, only those that ruled before the Empire of Greece is stirred up against Media-Persia.

(Note: The next king, 465-424 BC: Reign of Artaxerxes I, Longimanus, in his 7th year issued the decree for Ezra go to Israel (457-8 BC) to rebuld the city, followed by Nehemiah in the 20th year (444-5 BC) of this king.) to rebuild the walls.

. Dan. 11: 3-4
And a mighty King will arise, and will rule with great authority and do as he pleases. But as soon as he has arisen, his kingdom will be broken up and parceled out towards the four points of the compass, not to his descendants, nor according to his authority which he wielded; for his sovereignty will be uprooted and given to others besides them.
.

This was Alexander The Great, King of the Grecian Empire. When he took over Babylon he also made it his palace and ruled from there and died there, making him also a king of the North.

Dan 11:4
"But as soon as he has arisen, his kingdom will be broken up and parceled out toward the four points of the compass, though not to his {own} descendants, nor according to his authority which he wielded, for his sovereignty will be uprooted and {given} to others besides them.

When he died his kingdom was not passed on to his son, which he had through a Persian woman, but to his Generals (Princes). Two of these Generals became very great, Ptolemy, who took over Egypt in the South, and Seleucus I, who took the area of old Babylon, founding the city of Seleucia on the River Tigris. His kingdom stretched from Syria to India, and, because of this, he is sometimes referred to as the king of Syria. Seleucus I, became the next king of the North.


The Seleucid empire at its greatest extent stretched from Thrace to India and included almost all of Alexander the Great's conquests except Egypt. Seleucus, one of Alexander's generals, became satrap of Babylonia in 321 BC. In a prolonged power struggle between the Successors (Diadochoi) as they were called, Ptolemy (Egypt), Lysimachos (Thrace), Cassander (Macedon and Greece) and Seleucus ganged up on Antigonas (Asia) and defeated him at the battle of Ipsus in 301 BC. Seleucus was assassinated by the disgruntled son of Ptolemy in 281 BC. The kingdom was a major center of Hellenistic culture which maintained the pre-eminence of Greek customs and manners over the Middle East.
.
Dan. 11: 5-6
"Then the king of the South will grow strong, along with {one} of his princes who will gain ascendancy over him and obtain dominion; his domain {will be} a great dominion {indeed.} After some years they will form an alliance, and the daughter of the king of the South will come to the king of the North to carry out a peaceful arrangement. But she will not retain her position of power, nor will he remain with his power, but she will be given up, along with those who brought her in and the one who sired her as well as he who supported her in those times.
.
Verse 6 begins with Ptolemy II king(309-246 BC) (south) who gave his daughter, Bernice, as wife to Seleucus's son, Antiochus II (north). This made her next in line to be Queen of the Seleucus Kingdom. But within a few years Antiochus' former wife had her killed, and her infant son, and then also had Antiochus II himself killed.

. Dan. 11: 7-8
But one of the descendants of her line will arise in his place, and he will come against their army and enter the fortress of the king of the North, and he will deal with them and display great strength. :8 Also their gods with their metal images and their precious vessels of silver and gold he will take into captivity to Egypt, and he on his part will refrain from attacking the king of the North for some years.
.
But one of Bernice's descendants, Ptolemy III, avenged her death as we see in verse 7-8 as he not only defeats the king of the North but also brings back the riches into Egypt.

. Dan. 11: 9;
Then the latter will enter the realm of the king of the South, but will return to his own land.
.

The "latter" being the North in the last verse. This Northern king was Seleucus II attacked Egypt but was not successful.

. Dan. 11: 10
"And his sons will mobilize and assemble a multitude of great forces; and *one of them will keep coming and overflow and pass through, that he may again wage war up to his very fortress".
.
These were the two sons of Seleucus II, namely Seleucus III (226-223)and his brother Antiochus III (223-187 BC) .They were the next generations of Kings of the North that attacked the Southern kingdom.
The next 9 verses describe this war:

. Dan. 11: 11-12
The king of the South will be enraged and go forth and fight with the king of the North. Then the latter will raise a great multitude, but that multitude will be given into the hand of the former. :12 When the multitude is carried away, his heart will be lifted up, and he will cause tens of thousands to fall; yet he will not prevail.
.
The king of the South was Ptolemy V.

. Dan. 11: 13-14
For the king of the North will again raise a greater multitude than the former, and after an interval of some years he will press on with a great army and much equipment. :14 Now in those times many will rise up against the king of the South; the violent ones among your people will also lift themselves up in order to fulfill the vision, but they will fall down.
.
Antiochus III brought in Philip, the king of Macedonia,and his armies to help defeat Ptolemy IV and Ptolemy V but this was unsuccessful.

. Dan. 11: 15-16
Then the king of the North will come, cast up a siege ramp and capture a well-fortified city; and the forces of the South will not stand their ground, not even their choicest troops, for there will be no strength to make a stand.
:16 But he who comes against him will do as he pleases, and no one will be able to withstand him; he will also stay for a time in the Beautiful Land, with destruction in his hand.
.
Antiochus III was soldier of great ability. Between 212 to 205 he conquered Jerusalem from Ptolemy V along with his entire empire outside of Egypt. Antiochus's newly captured territory included Judaea and Jerusalem.

. Dan. 11: 17
He will set his face to come with the power of his whole kingdom, bringing with him a proposal of peace which he will put into effect; he will also give him the daughter of women to ruin it. But she will not take a stand for him or be on his side.
.
Antiochus III sought to bring peace between Syria and Egypt (under duress by Rome) by giving his daughter, Cleopatra to marry Ptolemy V Epiphanies of Egypt. Although Antiochus III hoped to destroy the land of Egypt through his daughter, he did not succeed because she always sided with her husband Ptolemy V
(Note: This was not the famous Cleopatra; she was number 7.)

. Dan. 11: 18-19
Then he will turn his face to the coastlands and capture many. But a commander will put a stop to his scorn against him; moreover, he will repay him for his scorn. :19 So he will turn his face toward the fortresses of his own land, but he will stumble and fall and be found no more.
.
Antiochus III began attacking the coastland but Rome came against him and he lost quickly. He was later killed while sacking a temple in Persia.

. Dan. 11: 20
Then in his place one will arise who will send an oppressor through the Jewel of his kingdom; yet within a few days he will be shattered, though neither in war nor in battle.
.
This was Seleucus IV. Rome got a foothold by taking his infant son and holding him hostage. Rome then demanded taxes in payment. They never returned his eldest son. Seleucus died of natural causes.
Note:Notice when it says "In his place" The word "place" means "estate, base", which means a new king of the same kingdom as the previous one mentioned in the prior verse. This is seen in vrs 7, 20, 21.

These verses below are the ones that cause the most misunderstanding among scholars.

Verses 21 through 28 only, are Antiochus IV (King 175-163 BC)
But first I am putting up the verses about this same man that we read about in Chapter 8 in the vision of the Ram and the Goat.
Please compare the two so that you can see that this is the same man.

Excerpt from Ram and Goat vision:
Dan 8:11
It even magnified itself to be equal with the Commander of Hosts.
23«In the latter period of their rule (The 4 Kingdoms that came out of Greece), When the transgressors have run their course, A king will arise, Insolent and skilled in intrigue.24 His power will be mighty, but not by his own power, And he will destroy to an extraordinary degree and prosper and perform his will; He will destroy mighty men and the holy people. 25 And through his shrewdness He will cause deceit to succeed by his influence; And he will magnify himself in his heart, And he will destroy many while they are at ease. He will even oppose the Prince of princes, But he will be broken without human agency.

This is the horn that comes out of one of the horns of the Grecian empire. It is Antiochus IV. In the below verse we are again given a description of Antiochus IV as being listed as a king of the North.

-----------------------------

. Dan 11:22-28
"In his place a despicable person will arise, on whom the honor of kingship has not been conferred, but he will come in a time of tranquility and seize the kingdom by intrigue. :22 "The overflowing forces will be flooded away before him and shattered, and also the prince of the covenant. :23 "After an alliance is made with him he will practice deception, and he will go up and gain power with a small {force of} people. :24 "In a time of tranquility he will enter the richest {parts} of the realm, and he will accomplish what his fathers never did, nor his ancestors; he will distribute plunder, booty and possessions among them, and he will devise his schemes against strongholds, but {only} for a time.
:25 "He will stir up his strength and courage against the king of the South with a large army; so the king of the South will mobilize an extremely large and mighty army for war; but he will not stand, for schemes will be devised against him. :26 "Those who eat his choice food will destroy him, and his army will overflow, but many will fall down slain. :27 "As for both kings, their hearts will be {intent} on evil, and they will speak lies {to each other} at the same table; but it will not succeed, for the end is still {to come} at the appointed time. :28 "Then he will return to his land with much plunder; but his heart will be {set} against the holy covenant, and he will take action and {then} return to his {own} land.
.
Antiochus IV, who was called Antiochus Epiphanies, was this "despicable" or "vile" person who came to the throne of Syria in 175 BC. These prophesies fit him like a glove. "Epiphanies" means "illustrious" but he was only so in his own eyes, though he flattered many.

Writers of his day, called him "odd-humored, rude & boisterous, base and sordid." Some thought him to be a fun guy; others felt he was nuts. (the latter, in a play on words, called him "Epimanes" or "the madman", but not to his face). He was long a hostage at Rome, after his father lost that great battle and he was forced to give he young son Antiochus to Rome, and he was still considered a prisoner "at large" by the Romans.


He gained the crown by a trick. He had his eldest brother's son, Demetrius, sent to Rome as a hostage, in exchange for himself. And when his brother was killed by Heliodorus, he took the crown for himself. He came in peaceably , pretending to be a regent for Demetrius, who remained as a hostage in Rome. There were no serious negotiations for his release.

:28 "Then he will return to his landwith much plunder;
but his heart will be {set} against the holy covenant, and he will take action
and {then} return to his {own} land

Notice that the scripture says he will return to his land twice!
.Antiochus IV invaded Egypt twice. The first time (170 BC) he captured Ptolemy, and agreed to let him continue as King, but as his puppet. Alexandria thereupon chose Ptolemy's brother Ptolemy Euergetes as King. In Antiochus' absence, the two brothers agreed to rule jointly. He then returned to his own land.
In 168 BC Antiochus again invaded, and overran all Egypt, except for Alexandria. He was threatened by Rome who simple drew a circle around him in the sand and said if you cross it Rome will come against you. At this same time the Jews had heard .Antiochus IV died in a second war with Ptolemy and had a great celebration of his death. But Antiochus had not died, and on his return from Egypt he took revenge on them, and ransacked Jerusalem. He was considered a madman by the Jews also because of the torture that he did to the people that wouldn't eat pig meat. He replaced the High Priest, Onias III, (Prince of the covenant) with Jason as High Priest. Jason then abolished the sacrifices. Antiochus IV set up a statue of Zeus in the temple and prohibited Judaism for three years, but the Maccabees revolted and in 165 BC defeated Antiochus IV and restored the temple. Antiochus IV returned home and died on that campaign in Persia in 164 B.C. of disease.

He is famous for doing the very things listed in these verses.
The vision about the 2300 evenings and mornings is about Antiochus IV.

Antiochus IV DIED he did not go to war against Egypt a third time so the next verses are not speaking of him.

Now in the next two verses we see that there is one more attempt by a King of the North, made by Antiochus' VII.

. Dan. 11:29-30
At the appointed time he (king of North) will return and come into the south, but this last time it will not turn out the way it did before. :30; for the ships of Kittim will come against him; therefore he will be disheartened, and will return and become enraged at the holy covenant, and take action, so he will come back and show regard for those who forsake the holy covenant.


Demetrius II (Nicator) 129-126/5. Demetrius tried to take Palestine, but Hyrcanus regained control by concluding a treaty with Rome. This section of history is also written about by Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews - Book XIII chapter 8-12.
and also (1 Macc.8:17-32) (1 Macc.7:5-9)


Note: The king of the North after this point is reduced to Syria/Babylon area, and through the Parthians this kingdom continues until the 2nd century AD when Rome takes Seleucia and puts an end to the last of the Grecian empire. But this prophecy reference to the Seleucid's Empire ends at this point because they were no longer a threat to Israel.
(The empire became weaker and weaker as Rome ate away at it. Rome took over the other three kings of South, East and West but the Northern kingdom held out the longest. When it was at its weakest, the Parthians, who had broken off from the kingdom because they followed the true king, the son of Alexander the Great, managed to take the kingdom. This made them the last of the kings of this Northern kingdom which lasted until the 2nd century AD when Seleucia finally fell to Rome.)

But Rome is not counted among these verses because they did not rule from the land of the two rivers, where old Babylon was located as all the previous Kings of the North in this Prophecy had ruled over Israel from.


IN OTHER WORDS, ROME WAS NOT A KING OF THE NORTH; THEREFORE, IT IS NOT LISTED AMONG THE VISION OF THE KINGS OF THE NORTH AND KINGS OF THE SOUTH!!
In the next verse God tells of a new kingdom of the North which captures Jerusalem. A kingdom which will spawn the the last days beast, but is also from this same land of the North making them kings of the North.

Reference to the Grecian Kings of the North ends here,
and the Islamic Empire (next king of the North ruling over the land of Israel) Begins.

Well like I said I've found numerous kings that could fit the description in my history books. However I firmly believe what God wants us to know is written in His word with study one may find an answer, so far I don't see any specifics mentioned. For now I look at the history of kings written in Daniel 12 as a clear indication what region of the world we should focus our attention and agree with you it is NOT Rome.

For some silly reason I am beginninng to lean more towards Iraq eventually being consumed by Iran. I keep thinking how Nebuchadnezzar whose kingdom was the land of the Chaldees was referred to as a king from the north when he came against Tyre and Jerusalem.

Just a guess maybe Iraq will eventually be consumed by Iran then watch as Persia battles for regional supremecy against Turkey and or the Southern king, tribe against tribe, with Israel in the middle. God knows and we, Lord willing, will watch and prepare.

I guess I should have just shown the order of the kings God referred to in this prophecy in their order like this.

Seleucus I Nicator (Satrap 311–305 BC, King 305 BC–281 BC)
Antiochus I Soter (co-ruler from 291, ruled 281–261 BC)
Antiochus II Theos (261–246 BC)
Seleucus II Callinicus (246–225 BC)
Seleucus III Ceraunus (or Soter) (225–223 BC)
Antiochus III the Great (223–187 BC)
Seleucus IV Philopator (187–175 BC)
Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 BC)

All Bible comentaries will agree with this. But many will apply verses beyond 11:28 to Antiochus IV. Amill apply him to all the remaing verses saying this prophecy is no longer relavent.

Each one fits his description in the Dan 11 prophecy. That is what is so baffling to historians (non-religious) is that God could list these kings out in their proper order one after the other, indentifying by the events in their lives and there battles with Egypt, before the kingdom of the Sedeucid's even existed. Praise the Lord! It brings Glory to His Name.

I don't know about Iran taking over Iraq and becoming the King of the North". The reason is because Iran is a follower of Gog. Iran isn't being shown as the leading nation.

God bless

who said anything about Iraq retaining its name if Iran goobles it up? Im just guessin anywho

who said anything about Iraq retaining its name if Iran goobles it up? Im just guessin anywho

Not me. Lol! Iran is called Persia in the Gog wars. It follows Gog. Is what I said. Are you thinking Iran swallows Iraq and the whole area becomes Persia?

I know Turkey is thought right now to be the kingdom of the north and now possible Russia will be a player too. But I have a question for ya'all, the scenario in Exekiel 38 & 39, isn't it more along the lines of describing whats going to happen to certain nations when Christ returns? As it appears He will be personally involved in their destruction.

In other portions I read Anti-Christ wars against the kings of the south. But in Ezekiel all the nations north and south are gathered together and God destroys them. Two different battles, one before the end of the seventieth week and one after tribulation. The second happening in that extra months of days written in Daniel 12 maybe.

So far I understand (forgive me if Im wrong) Christ will not return until the falling away comes first AND the man of sin is revealed. The man of sin (Anti-Christ) which if I read it right is dead at the end of seven years. THEN after immediately after tribulation Christ returns and battles against the nations Gog, of the land of Magog, Cush, Put, Togarmah etc etc.

Maybe Nebuchad-nezzars old kingdom will be the kingdom that wars against the kings of south. And Gog, of the land of Magog and the others are gonna get theirs when Christ returns.


Oh and yes, I suppose it could be considered by some as Persian

I'm new here, but I have been lurking and reading as much as I can on this forum. There is a lot of new information here that made me revise my thinking.

Reading this thread, I cannot help but think about the thighs. There was a Greek empire, which broke up and the western portion was absorbed/taken over by the Romans which later became the papacy. To the far east (of Rome, actually north of the Middle East) what would become the Ottoman empire and the final spiting into two came when the Ottoman Empire conquered the city of Constantinople (which was known as the Eastern Rome.)

Eventually, the Ottoman Empire covered all the area that the earlier empires covered.

The following link to an image that shows the origin and growth of the Ottoman Empire:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:OttomanEmpireIn1683.png

I'm inclined to think that the fourth empire is the Ottoman Empire, but I had a thought (inspired by God I believe) that the two iron legs could be the Ottoman Empire on one leg and the Roman Papacy on the other leg as both are more or less an outgrowth/continuation of the Greek Empire.

So could it be that five of the kingdoms is from the east (five toes on one foot) and the other five is from the west (five toes on the other foot)?

Remember I'm new here so please be kind to me while tearing up this idea!

Hi babysteps,

Its been a long while since I looked at this. What I tried to do here is put together a recap based upon what I found without any other resource but the Holy Bible.

With that said, we know God specifically numbered 4 kingdoms (Daniel chapter 2). We also can at the least surmise 3 of those four are specifically named in later chapters of Daniel, the head, Babylon; breast and arms, Madi-Persian; belly and thighs, Greek. The fourth kingdom (legs and feet) though never named is I believe identified to us by location as the king of the north (chapter 11). If you were working on a manuevering board Jerusalem would be 'e' and all direction is relative to it. I also think the northern kingdom as told to us Daniel is described in Ezekiel 12:13 as the land of the Chaldeans.

In the Antiquities of the Jews Book 1 chapter 7 by Flavious Josephus the land of the Chaldee was a land above Babylon. "Abram reigned at Damascus, being a foreigner, who came with an army out of the land above Babylon, called the land of the Chaldeans: but, after a long time, he got him up, and removed from that country also, with his people, and went into the land then called the land of Canaan, but now the land of Judea, and this when his posterity were become a multitude; as to which posterity of his, we relate their history in another work. Now the name of Abram is even still famous in the country of Damascus; and there is shown a village named from him, The Habitation of Abram."

I just don't see how Rome has anything to with it. If Rome was the king of the north imagine his armies better learn how to swim because Jerusalem is not south of it the Mediterranean Sea is.

Now why God goes into the detail of mentioning the toes I don't really know. Most likley though assuming the image is that of a healthy human having ten toes it could have to do with the 10 kings mentioned in Revelations 12:3; 13:1 and 17:12. I don't know what kings are being spoken of but I lean towards the possiblity of a United Islamic kingdom in the future and it could be the kings who bow to a Mahdi. But thats just my gut and imagination working.