Daniel and Paul's Willful King (cont'd)

Many commentators see the eschatological man of sin definitely portrayed in Daniel 11:36-45. I hold the opinion that the description of this person begins in Daniel 11:21 and continues to verse 45, the end of the chapter. Below the personal pronouns describing him are capitalized for emphasis on the fact that he will be a male person as so described.

21 "He will be succeeded by a contemptible PERSON who has not been given the honor of royalty. HE will invade the kingdom when its people feel secure, and HE will seize it through intrigue. 22 Then an overwhelming army will be swept away before HIM; both it and a prince of the covenant will be destroyed. 23 After coming to an agreement with him, HE will act deceitfully, and with only a few people HE will rise to power. 24 When the richest provinces feel secure, HE will invade them and will achieve what neither HIS fathers nor HIS forefathers did. HE will distribute plunder, loot and wealth among HIS followers. HE will plot the overthrow of fortresses””but only for a time. 25 "With a large army HE will stir up HIS strength and courage against the king of the South. The king of the South will wage war with a large and very powerful army, but he will not be able to stand because of the plots devised against him. 26 Those who eat from the king’s provisions will try to destroy him; his army will be swept away, and many will fall in battle. 27 The two kings, with their hearts bent on evil, will sit at the same table and lie to each other, but to no avail, because an end will still come at the appointed time. 28 The king of the North will return to HIS own country with great wealth, but HIS heart will be set against the holy covenant. HE will take action against it and then return to HIS own country. 29 "At the appointed time HE will invade the South again, but this time the outcome will be different from what it was before. 30 Ships of the western coastlands will oppose HIM, and HE will lose heart. Then HE will turn back and vent HIS fury against the holy covenant. HE will return and show favor to those who forsake the holy covenant. 31 "HIS armed forces will rise up to desecrate the temple fortress and will abolish the daily sacrifice. Then they will set up the abomination that causes desolation. 32 With flattery HE will corrupt those who have violated the covenant, but the people who know their God will firmly resist HIM. 33 "Those who are wise will instruct many, though for a time they will fall by the sword or be burned or captured or plundered. 34 When they fall, they will receive a little help, and many who are not sincere will join them. 35 Some of the wise will stumble, so that they may be refined, purified and made spotless until the time of the end, for it will still come at the appointed time.

THE KING WHO EXALTS HIMSELF

36 "The king will do as HE pleases. HE will exalt and magnify himself above every god and will say unheard-of things against the God of gods. HE will be successful until the time of wrath is completed, for what has been determined must take place. 37 HE will show no regard for the gods of HIS ancestors or for the one desired by women, nor will HE regard any god, but will exalt HIMSELF above them all. 38 Instead of them, HE will honor a god of fortresses; a god unknown to HIS ancestors HE will honor with gold and silver, with precious stones and costly gifts. 39 HE will attack the mightiest fortresses with the help of a foreign god and will greatly honor those who acknowledge HIM. HE will make them rulers over many people and will distribute the land at a price. 40 "At the time of the end the king of the South will engage HIM in battle, and the king of the North will storm out against HIM with chariots and cavalry and a great fleet of ships. HE will invade many countries and sweep through them like a flood. 41 HE will also invade the Beautiful Land. Many countries will fall, but Edom, Moab and the leaders of Ammon will be delivered from HIS hand. 42 HE will extend his power over many countries; Egypt will not escape. 43 HE will gain control of the treasures of gold and silver and all the riches of Egypt, with the Libyans and Cushites in submission. 44 But reports from the east and the north will alarm HIM, and HE will set out in a great rage to destroy and annihilate many. 45 HE will pitch his royal tents between the seas at the beautiful holy mountain. Yet HE will come to his end, and no one will help HIM. (Daniel 11:36-37)

Daniel 11:31: "HIS armed forces will rise up to desecrate the temple fortress and will abolish the daily sacrifice. Then they will set up the abomination that causes desolation.

Under his leadership, his forces will abolish the daily sacrifice. Daily sacrifices will have to be going on again for them to be abolished and stopped.

Under him an "abomination of desolation" will occur - the "abomination that causes desolation” - paired with Matthew 24:15; II Thess 2:3-4.

HE will exalt himself above all gods and declare himself to be God.

Daniel 11:36: "The king will do as HE pleases. HE will exalt and magnify himself above every god and will say unheard-of things against the God of gods.

Paired with II Thess 2:3-4: 3 Let no man deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits in the temple of God, showing himself, that He is God.

In II Thess 2:3-4, especially verse 4, Paul is quoting Daniel 11:36 almost verbatim. This human person seen in Daniel is who Paul is referring to. In II Thess 2:3-4. Why would Paul pick this specific reference in Daniel 11:36 to quote? Because Daniel 11:36 and II Thess 2:4 are referring to the same person. Antiochus and Titus never completely fulfilled these prophecies. Another point is, how could Antiochus be the final ultimate man of sin, because Jesus said "when you see” the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet. How could those of Jesus' day see Antiochus perform this abomination when Antiochus lived several centuries before? Antiochus and Titus, who didn't exhaustively fulfill the prophecies, were types and foreshadows of the ultimate fulfillment of this man of sin to occur far in the eschatological future at the end of the age. This is in keeping with the template pattern of much of biblical prophecy. He will be a startling counterfeit of Christ and be loaded with lying signs and wonder (II Thess 2:9) so as to imitate Christ but whose ultimate goal will be to replace (anti-Christ) Christ. The "abomination” he will perform is the starting point for the final great tribulation heralding the end of the age and Christ's return (Matthew 24:15-21). I see no way that the events of 70 AD fulfilled this in its entirety. At this point, we have come full circle and once again the nation of Israel is back in the land in much the same condition as it disappeared in 70 AD. And Jerusalem is once again surrounded by hostile armies intent on its destruction and the Jewish population that resides there and in the land. We are among the first Christian generations to see a Jewish presence in the land again after almost 2,000 years. We are seeing the exact same thing as 70 AD all over again. It's prophesied they would return largely in unbelief. Their unbelief is no reason to stand off from them. They need Christ worse than they need a victory over Hamas. Let us pray toward that end.

Meanwhile, the man of sin, the great destroyer, the man of lawlessness, is still to appear. Yet he will come to his end between the Mediterranean Sea and Jerusalem, God's Holy Mountain (Daniel 11:45). So he will be present in the land at the end to be destroyed at Christ's return (II Thess 2:8). But Christ and His keeping power cannot be shaken. The issue is decided, it's just certain events must occur before we get to Jesus' return. No amount of revival, which I pray for, will allow the church to get around or avoid these final events. The Jewish people and the controversy of them in the land and who is the proper owner of the city of Jerusalem will be at the epi-center of final events. Paul's willful king is yet to appear. None of the modern prophets have addressed this in any depth as far as I can determine. They need to.

The only disputable portion (ie that could be describing a future Antichrist) is 11:36 and following.

The prior portions of Daniel 11 so accurately portrayed actual historical events that there has been much criticism that it could not have been prophetic, but rather was written after the events described.

””””””””
So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel””let the reader understand””
16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.
17 Let no one on the housetop go down to take anything out of the house. Mt 24:15-17

When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near.
21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. Lk 21:20-21
””””””””””

If you compare the above two passages, Jesus either said two different things regarding the "abomination that causes desolation” meaning he was very unclear, or he said one thing that was written down in different ways by two different authors (one to converted Jewish Christians and the other for gentile converts).

Why would Jesus want gentile converts to believe that the abomination that causes desolation was the Roman army invading Jerusalem and sacking the temple but want Jewish converts to believe it is something else?

I submit He did not say two different things and the two verses are easily reconciled.

Further, why would Jesus expect the Matthew readers to interpret some sort of "far future timeshift” at Mt. 24:15 when there is clearly no such time shift in Lk 21:20?

/The only disputable portion (ie that could be describing a future Antichrist) is 11:36 and following.

The prior portions of Daniel 11 so accurately portrayed actual historical events that there has been much criticism that it could not have been prophetic, but rather was written after the events described./

I'll just say, if Daniel 11:1-35 was not prophetically written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and only added later by human authors after the events occurred, then the word of God is not fully inspired. I sincerely hope you don't take that view. I'm assuming that the all-knowing Holy Spirit can prophesy accurately regarding future events. Daniel 10:21 states the heavenly messenger said, "But I will tell you what is noted in the Scripture of Truth." Daniel chapter 11 follows. Also, Daniel 11:2 states, "And now I tell you the Truth." There's Nothing in there that later authors added on to Scripture after the fact.

Meanwhile, From George Eldon Ladd's introduction to his work on Revelation. It helps explain the near/far fulfillment pattern of much prophecy, notable eschatological prophecy. Even John Calvin believed in this characteristic of prophecy.

(BEGIN)

This brings us to a characteristic of Old Testament prophecy which is also a characteristic of the Revelation and which solves this problem of distance and relevance. As we have just pointed out, the prophets had two foci in their prophetic perspective: the events of the present and the immediate future and the ultimate eschatological event. These two are held in a dynamic tension often without chronological distinction, for the main purpose of prophecy is not to give a program or chart of the future, but to let the light of the eschatological consummation fall on the present (2Pet 1:19).

Thus, in Amos’ prophecy the impending historical judgment on Israel at the hands of Assyria was called the Day of the Lord (Amos 5:18, 27), and the eschatological salvation of Israel will also occur in that day (9:11). Isaiah pictured the overthrow of Babylon in apocalyptic colors as though it were the end of the world (Isa 13:1-22). Zephaniah described some (to us) unknown historical visitation as the Day of the Lord which would consume the earth and its inhabitants (Isa 1:2-18) as though with fire (Isa 1:18, 3:8). Joel moved imperceptibly from historical plagues of locust and drought into the eschatological judgments of the Day of the Lord.

In other words, the imminent historical judgment is seen as a type of, or a prelude to, the eschatological judgment. The two are often blended together in apparent disregard for chronology, for the same God who acts in the imminent historical judgment will also act in the final eschatological judgment to further his one redemptive purpose. Thus, Daniel viewed the great eschatological enemy of God’s people as the historical king of Greece (Antiochus Epiphanes of the Seleucid Kingdom ”“ Dan 11:3), who yet took on the coloration of the eschatological Antichrist (Dan 12:36-39) In the same way, our Lord’s Olivet Discourse was concerned with both the historical judgment of Jerusalem at the hands of the Roman armies (Luke 21:20ff.) and the eschatological appearance of Antichrist (Matt 24:15ff.). Rome was a historical forerunner of Antichrist.

Thus, while the Revelation was primarily concerned to assure the churches of Asia of the final eschatological salvation at the end of the age, together with the judgment of the evil world powers, this had immediate relevance to the first century. For the demonic powers which will be manifested at the end in the great tribulation were also to be seen in the historical hatred of Rome for God’s people and the persecution they were to suffer at Rome’s hands.

Therefore, we conclude that the correct method of interpreting the Revelation is a blending of the preterist and futuristic methods. The beast is both Rome and the eschatological Antichrist ”“ and, we might add, any demonic power which the church must face in her entire history. The great tribulation is primarily an eschatological event, but it includes all tribulation which the church may experience at the hands of the world, whether by first century Rome or by later evil powers.

This interpretation is borne out by several objective facts. First: it is the nature of apocalyptic writings to be primarily concerned with the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose and the eschatological end of the age. This is the theme of the Revelation: "Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him”(1:7). Second: it is the nature of apocalyptic symbolism, whether canonical or non-canonical, to refer to events in history leading up to, and associated with, this eschatological consummation. Third: as already noted, the book claims to be a prophecy. We have already seen that the nature of prophecy is to let light shine from the future upon the present. (END)

It goes much toward explaining any supposed discrepancy between Matthew 24:15 and Luke 21:20.

In II Thessalonians 2:4, why do you think Paul was led to go to Daniel 11:36 and choose that particular verse to describe the eschatological man of sin who has to appear before the day of the Lord (II Thess 2:3)?

I believe it is because Daniel 11:36 and II Thess 2:3-4 are speaking of the same individual.

You may be right.

And no, I don’t take that view of the first portion of Daniel 11. I was just pointing out that those verses so accurately described future historical events that critics say it had to have been written after the events.

The question still remains though what Jesus actually said in the Olivet Discourse about the abomination that causes desolation, and why Matthew and Luke record it differently. It seems that Luke simply clarifies what Jesus meant in Matthew and Mark. Obviously they can’t contradict.

Brother Todd, do you consider yourself a partial preterist or full preterist? I only ask because I’ve recently been talking with a brother about these positions for the first time. I’ve not taken a deep dive into it yet. But I’m interested.

I am closest to what you would call a partial preterist. Full preterists believe the second coming already occurred in the first century. I certainly do not.