Daniel 11:1

The remarkably accurate prophecies of this chapter are so true, so astounding, and so wonderfully accurate that the whole critical world for centuries have never questioned a single one of them. The only allegation that Bible enemies have ever been able to bring against this chapter is that it is so exactly accurate that it had to be written after the events prophesied had already occurred. This slander against the Book of Daniel has existed a long time. It was first advanced by Malchus Porphyrius a follower of Plotinus who was bitterly opposed to Christianity. Porphyry is the Anglicized form of his name; and he lived 233-304(?) A.D.[1] Since the great burden of these prophecies concerns the time following 250 B.C. (all of the prophecies dealing with Antiochus and the Maccabean rebellion), the undeniable refutation of the critical position is inherent in the fact that every single line of Daniel existed centuries prior to those events! The Septuagint (LXX) (translated into Greek in 250 B.C.) has every line of Daniel, centuries prior to the events which are admittedly prophesied in Daniel!

It is a comment on the sterility and impotence of criticism that not a single new argument has been invented against Daniel in the last 1600 years!.

The present-day student of the Bible is not overly concerned about the details of the pre-Christian history of Israel during the inter-testamental period and with the details of the depraved struggles of the pagan world powers and their ultimate efforts to exterminate the true worship of God. The undisputed point to remember about all of this is that Daniel's prophecy has an accurate, detailed account of what was to happen, and of what did actually occur.

As Millard stated it, "It is this vision (the eleventh chapter) above all that leads many to the second century dating of the book (Daniel)."[2]

First, we shall take a look at the sacred text.

Daniel 11:1-21a

"And as for me, in the first year of Darius the Mede, I stood up to confirm and strengthen him." (Actually the conclusion of Daniel 10).

"And now will I show thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and when he is waxed strong through his riches, he shall stir up all against the realm of Greece. And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will. And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven, but not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion wherewith he ruled; for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others besides these.

And the king of the south shall be strong, and one of his princes; and he shall be strong above him, and have dominion; and his dominion shall be a great dominion. And at the end of years they shall join themselves together; and the daughter of the king of the south shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement: but she shall not retain the strength of her arm; neither shall he stand, nor his arm; but she shall be given up, and they that brought her, and he that begat her, and he that strengthened her in those times.

But out of a shoot from her roots shall one stand up in his place, who shall come unto the army, and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north, and shall deal against them, and shall prevail. And also their gods, with their molten images, and with their goodly vessels of silver and of gold, shall he carry captive into Egypt; and he shall refrain some years from the king of the north. And he shall come into the realm of the king of the south, but he shall return into his own land.

And his sons shall war, and shall assemble a multitude of great forces, which shall come on, and overflow, and pass through; and they shall return and war, even to his fortress. And the kings of the south shall be moved with anger, and shall come forth and fight with him, even with the king of the north; and he shall set forth a great multitude, and the multitude shall be given into his hand. And the multitude shall be lifted up, and his heart shall be exalted; and he shall cast down tens of thousands, but he shall not prevail. And the king of the north shall return, and shall set forth a multitude greater than the former; and he shall come on at the end of the times, even of years, with a great army, and with much substance. And in those times shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the children of the violent among thy people shall lift themselves up to establish the vision; but they shall fall. So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mound, and take a well-fortified city: and the forces of the south shall not stand, neither his chosen people, neither shall there be any strength to stand. But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him; and he shall stand in the glorious land, and in his hand shall be destruction. And he shall set his face to come with the strength of his whole kingdom, and with him equitable conditions; and he shall perform them; and he shall give him the daughter of women, to corrupt her; but she shall not stand neither be for him. After this shall he turn his face unto the isles, and shall take many: but a prince shall cause the reproach offered by him to cease; yea, he shall cause his reproach to turn upon him. Then he shall turn his face toward the fortresses of his own land; but he shall stumble and fall, and shall not be found.

Then shall stand up in his place one that shall cause an exactor to pass through the glory of the kingdom; but within few days shall he be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle. And in his place shall stand up a contemptible person, to whom they had not given the honor of the kingdom."

There is no way that this prophecy actually qualifies as some kind of a historical survey passed off as a pretended prophecy. The critical proposition that some forger in the second century wrote this is obviously ridiculous. What "historical survey" could possibly have passed over the tremendous military campaign of Xerxes against Greece with its tremendous battles which are still the talk of all mankind? Later on in Daniel 11:34, the great campaigns of the Maccabees were practically ignored, being called in that verse "a little help!" It is simply impossible to suppose that any person whatever could have written such a thing after those stirring events of the Maccabean rebellion.

The whole proposition that this chapter is a prophecy "post eventum" (after the event) is false, contrived, unsupported by anything whatever except the unbelieving slanders of the Bible by evil men. Keil has summarized some of the reasons why it is impossible intellectually to allow the allegations against the chapter which are advanced by unbelievers. His conclusion was that, "The contents and form of this prophecy contain much which a supposed Maccabean origin makes in the highest degree improbable, and directly contradicts."[3]

Moreover, all of the exact dates and many other particulars which are alleged to be in the prophecy are simply not in it. For example, take a look at Dummelow's analysis of what he alleges to be prophesied here:

"Yet three kings ..." (Daniel 11:2) "These are Cambyses, Darius I (Hystaspes), and Xerxes I (Ahasuerus). The fourth including Cyrus I is Xerxes I, a king of vast wealth. He prepared a great army and navy, invaded Greece, encountered total failure, suffered great losses at Thermopylae, Salamis (480 B.C.) and at Plataea and Mycale."[4] Note that hardly any of this is actually in the prophecy!

"A mighty king ..." (Daniel 11:3) Alexander the Great (333:322 B.C.)."

"The partition of Alexander's empire is described."[5] (Daniel 11:4)

"The king of the south ..." (Daniel 11:5) "This is Ptolemy I (Sorer), the first Egyptian king." "One of his princes ..." is Seleucus I (Nicator), the first Syrian king.

"The king's daughter of the south ..." (Daniel 11:6) is a reference to Berenice, daughter of Ptolemy II (Philadelphus). She was given in Marriage to Antiochus II. On the death of Ptolemy II, Antiochus divorced Berenice and took Laodice back. Laodice poisoned Antiochus, and their son Seleucus (afterward Callinicus) murdered Berenice and her child. "He that begat here, etc..." refers to Ptolemy II.

Ptolemy III (Euergetes), brother of Berenice, to avenge his sister's death invaded Syria, then ruled by Callinicus, captured Seleucia and returned to Egypt with much spoil. "A branch of her (Berenice's) roots ..." was her brother Ptolemy III. (Daniel 11:7-8)

(Daniel 11:9) Seleucus II (Callinicus) invaded Egypt in 242 B.C. but had to retreat.

Daniel 11:10; "His sons ..." The sons of Seleucus II were Saleucus III and Antiochus III (called the Great).

Daniel 11:11 is an allusion to the battle of Raphia.

Daniel 11:12 refers to Ptolemy the IV.

Daniel 11:13,14. Twelve years later Antiochus joined with Philip of Macedon in an attack upon Ptolemy V (Epiphanes), son of Ptolemy IV.

Daniel 11:15,16. Antiochus III shut up Ptolemy V in Sidon, where Ptolemy surrendered in 198 B.C. Antiochus then overran Palestine and threatened Egypt. "The glorious land" (in Daniel 11:16) is Palestine."

"A well fortified city ..."; Daniel 11:15 is a reference to Sidon.

"He that cometh ..." (Daniel 11:16) is Antiochus III. "Against him ..." against Ptolemy V.

(Daniel 11:17) Antiochus III gave his daughter Cleopatra in marriage to Ptolemy V.

"...The isles ..." (Daniel 11:18) is a reference to the coastlands on the shores of the Aegean Sea.

"A prince on his own behalf ..." is the Roman general Scipio.

"Fortresses of his own land ..."; Daniel 11:19 is a reference to his withdrawal to Syria.

"Then shall stand up in his place one ... and in his place shall stand up a contemptible person ..." (Daniel 11:20-21) Antiochus III was succeeded by Seleucus IV (Philopater) who sent his chief minister to take charge of the Temple treasures in Jerusalem. That chief minister (Heliodorus) murdered Seleucus IV and tried to usurp the kingdom, but he was dispossessed by Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), the brother of Seleucus. Antiochus Eipihanes was the contemptible one.

The next major paragraph of the prophecy is devoted to the career of Antiochus Epiphanes (176-164 B.C.).

We leave it to any fair minded person to judge whether or not a// of this is spelled out in the prophecy. The purpose of such detail is to show how it would have been impossible for a prophecy written before the event could possibly have contained so many details. However, critics need to remember that the sacred prophecies contain all kinds of the most detailed information.

Examples: (1) The exact amount, kind, and disposition of the 30 pieces of silver weighed out for Jesus' betrayal by Judas was prophesied (Zechariah 11:12). (2) There were two Bethlehems in ancient Israel; but the prophet declared that Christ would be born in Bethlehem Judah (Micah 5:2). (3) More than 20 of the most particular details of the crucifixion of Christ were foretold in Psalms 22, including even the fact of the soldiers gambling for the seamless robe of Christ! This list could be extended for many pages; but it is obvious to all Christians that true prophecy did indeed predict the most exact and circumstantial details; and the very fact of the critics finding all the details noted above in this prophecy of Daniel is merely what they should have expected to find. Remember, there is no doubt whatever that Daniel existed for centuries before these events happened. As old H. A. Ironside put it, "Don't ever forget that history is His Story!"[6] In this amazing prophecy, God wrote it down (through Daniel) before it happened!