Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 10:20
Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Greece shall come.
20. Knowest thou, &c.] A rhetorical question, designed to recall to Daniel what had been said in Dan 10:12 ; Dan 10:14, and to indicate to him its importance.
and now will I return, &c.] to carry on and complete the successes begun in Dan 10:13. ‘Now’ must mean, as soon as possible, as soon as I have given thee this revelation (Dan 11:2 ff.): I cannot tarry here longer than is necessary, as I have still to contend in heaven against the enemies of Israel.
and when I go forth (viz. from the contest with the ‘prince’ of Persia), lo, the prince of Greece (Heb. Javan, as Dan 8:21) will come in ] As soon as the conflict with Persia is ended, one with Greece will begin: ‘go forth’ and ‘come in,’ as 2Ki 11:5; 2Ki 11:7. It would be more in accordance with the usual sense of go forth in such a connexion as the present, to understand it of going forth to the contest with the prince of Persia (cf. of going forth on a military expedition, with to battle expressed, Deu 20:1; Deu 21:10; without it, Jdg 9:29, 2Sa 11:1 ; 2Sa 18:2 ( end), 3, 6, 2Ki 9:21, &c.); but unless the future is greatly foreshortened, or ‘go forth’ is understood not of proceeding to, but of continuing in, the conflict (so Keil), this interpretation agrees hardly with the history; for the empire of Alexander and his successors did not arise till two centuries after the time of Cyrus.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? – This was known by what the angel had said in Dan 10:14. He seems to have called his attention to it, and to have proposed the question, because Daniel had been so overcome by his fright that it might be doubtful whether he had understood him distinctly when he had told him the object of his coming. He therefore proposes the question here; and as the silence of Daniel seems to have been construed as a declaration that he did understand the purpose of the visit, he proceeds to unfold frilly the purport of his message.
And now will I return – That is, evidently, after he had made known to him the message which he came to deliver. He cannot mean that he would then leave Daniel, and return immediately to Persia, for he proceeds at length Dan. 1112 to deliver his message to him, and to state what would occur in the world in future times.
To fight with the prince of Persia – In Dan 10:13, he says that he had had a contest with that prince, and that in consequence of that he had been delayed on his journey to Daniel. By the interposition of Michael, the affairs of Persia had been so arranged that the opposition to what was desired by Daniel had been in part removed – so far, at least, as to make it certain that Iris prayers would be answered. See the note at that verse. But still it would seem that the difficulty was not entirely overcome, and that it would be desirable for him to return, and to complete the arrangements which had been commenced. There were still causes in existence in Persia which might tend to frustrate all these plans unless they were counteracted, and his presence might still be necessary there to secure the safe return of the exiles to their own land, and the means required to rebuild the city and temple. The simple meaning of this is, that it would be necessary to exert a farther influence at the Persian court in order to bring about the object desired; and this fact is expressed in language derived from the belief that angelic beings, good and bad, have much to do in controlling the minds of men.
And when I am gone forth – literally, and I go forth. The meaning seems to be, that he would return to Persia, and would so direct affairs there that the welfare of the Jews would be promoted, and that protection would be extended to them. This, he says, he would continue as long as it was necessary, for when he should have gone forth, the king of Greece would come, and the affairs of Persia would be put on a new footing, but on such a footing as not to require his presence – for the government would be of itself favorable to the Jews. The sense is, that up to the time when this king of Grecia should come, there would be a state of things in the Persian court that would demand the presence of some being from heaven – exerting some constant influence to prevent an outbreak against the Jews, and to secure their peace and prosperity; but that when the king of Grecia should come, he would himself favor their cause, and render the presence of the angel unnecessary. No one can prove that this is not a correct representation, or that the favor shown to the Jews at the Persian court during all the time of the rebuilding of the city and the temple, was not to be traced to some presiding influence from above, or that that was not put forth in connection with the ministration of an angelic being. Indeed, it is in accordance with all the teachings of the Bible that the disposition of kings and princes to show favor to the people of God, like all else that is good in this world, is to be traced to an influence from above; and it is not contrary to any of the laws of analogy, or anything with which we are acquainted pertaining to the spiritual world, to suppose that angelic interposition may be employed in any case in bringing about what is good.
Lo, the prince of Grecia shall come – Hebrew – yavan. There can be no doubt that Greece is intended. The word properly denotes Ionia (derived from this word), the name of which province, says Gesenius, as being adjacent to the East, and better known, was extended so as to comprehend the whole of Greece, as is expressly said by Greek writers themselves. – Lexicon By the prince of Greece here, there can be no doubt that there is reference to Alexander the Great, who conquered Persia. See Dan 11:1-4. The meaning here is, that when he should come, and conquer Persia, the opposition which the Hebrews had encountered from that country would cease, and there would then be no need of the interposition of the angel at the Persian court. The matter of fact was, that the Hebrews were favored by Alexander the Great, and that whatever there was in the Persian or Chaldean power which they had had reason to dread was then brought to an end, for all those Eastern governments were absorbed in the empire of Alexander – the Macedonian monarchy.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 20. Knowest thou wherefore I come] So high art thou in the favour of God, that he hath sent me unto thee to give thee farther satisfaction; though I was elsewhere employed upon a most important mission, and I must speedily return to accomplish it, viz.: –
To fight with the king of Persia] To remove all the scruples of Cyrus, and to excite him to do all that God designs him to do for the restoration of my people, and the rebuilding of the city and temple of Jerusalem. Nothing less than a supernatural agency in the mind of Cyrus can account for his decree in favour of the Jews. He had no natural, no political inclination to it; and his reluctance to obey the heavenly motions is here represented as a fight between him and the angel.
The prince of Grecia shall come.] I believe this refers to Alexander the Great, who was to destroy the Persian empire. See the second and third verses of the following chapter. See Clarke on Da 11:2; “Da 11:3“.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? i.e. by what I have said already, and what I have further to tell thee upon thy prayers, which God hath accepted, and hath given me in charge to reveal to thee as followeth to the end.
To fight with the prince of Persia; Cyrus, or Cambyses, who by his counsels and captains hinder the work of God; and to bring the prince of Greece upon him, viz. Alexander the Great, who utterly ruined the Persian monarchy, which is ushered with the word
to, because it was a wonder that the prince of Greece with thirty thousand men should do it. Thus the Lord sets and disposeth the fates of empires, and changeth them as he lists; especially in his churchs quarrel.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
20. Knowest thou whereforeTheangel asks, after Daniel had recovered from his fright, whether hehas understood what was revealed (Da10:13). On Daniel, by his silence, intimating that he didunderstand, the angel declares he will return to renew the fight withthe evil angel, the prince of Persia. This points to new difficultiesto the Jews’ restoration which would arise in the Persian court, butwhich would be counteracted by God, through the ministry of angels.
prince of Grecia shallcomeAlexander the Great, who conquered Persia, and favored theJews [CALVIN]. Rather, asthe prince of Persia is an angel, representing the hostile worldpower, so the prince of Grecia is a fresh angelic adversary,representing Greece. When I am gone forth from conquering the Persianfoe, a fresh one starts up, namely, the world power that succeedsPersia, Greece; Antiochus Epiphanes, and his antitype Antichrist, buthim, too, with the help of Michael, Israel’s champion, I shallovercome [GEJER].
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Then said he, knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee?…. He had told him before, Da 10:12, that it was on account of his prayers, and to bring an answer to them; and particularly to inform him what would befall his people in the latter day; and now, lest, through the hurry of his spirits, he had not observed it, or had forgot it, he reminds him of it, to stir up his desire the more after the knowledge of particulars, which he was now about to relate unto him: and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia; the evil spirit, in the court of Persia, he had been contesting with before, and had got the better of by the help of Michael; but since this good angel had been with Daniel, the evil one had been working upon the king and counsellors of Persia, and had wrought them up to an indifference unto, or carelessness about, the affairs of the people of the Jews, and to listen to their adversaries, whereby the building of the city and temple went on heavily and slowly; and so things were, through the evil influence of Satan, more or less, until the twentieth year of Artaxerxes Longimanus: and, indeed, Satan was continually soliciting mischief against the Jews, and stirring up enemies to them in the court of Persia, as long as that monarchy lasted, though he had not always the wished for success; the times of Esther and Mordecai are a proof of this:
and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come; meaning, when he was gone forth from the court of Persia, having done his business he was sent about; confounded the schemes and baffled the designs of the evil spirit, conquered him, and obliged him to give way, and cease from being troublesome any more, and obtained peace and rest for the Jews, and settled their affairs: the Persian monarchy being translated to the Grecians, the evil spirit began to work among them, to put them on doing mischief to the people of God; as in Alexander himself, who set out against them, but was pacified by the meeting of the high priest; and more especially in his successors; and above all in Antiochus, who was a violent persecutor of them; which this clause, as well as the following prophecy, has a respect unto.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
But before he communicated to Daniel what would befall his people in the “latter days” (Dan 10:14), he gives to him yet further disclosures regarding the proceedings in the spirit-kingdom which determine the fate of nations, and contain for Israel, in the times of persecution awaiting them, the comforting certainty that they had in the Angel of the Lord and in the guardian angel Michael a strong protection against the enmities of the heathen world. Kliefoth supposes that the angel who speaks in v. 20 – Daniel 11:1 gives a brief resum of the contents of his previous statement (Dan 10:12-14). But it is not so. These verses, 10:20-11:1, contain new disclosures not yet made known in Dan 11:12-19, although resembling the contents of Dan 10:13. Of the coming of the prince of Javan (v. 20 b), and the help which the angel-prince renders to Darius (Dan 11:1), nothing is said in Dan 10:13; also what the Angel of the Lord, Dan 10:20, says regarding the conflict with the prince of Persia is different from that which is said in Dan 10:13. In Dan 10:13 he speaks of that which he has done before his coming to Daniel; in Dan 10:20, of that which he will now do. To the question, “Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee?” no answer follows; it has, however, an affirmative sense, and is only an animated mode of address to remind Daniel of that which is said in Dan 10:12-14, and to impress it upon him as weighty and worthy of consideration. Then follows the new communication: “and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia,” i.e., to carry forward and bring to an end the victory gained for thee before my arrival over the demon of Persia, the spirit of the Persian kingdom.
The words which follow, ‘ (v. 20 b, and when I am gone forth, lo, etc.), present some difficulty. The in comparison with ( will I return) points to a contrast, and plainly indicates that which shall begin with the . By this, the union of the with that which goes before and the adversative interpretation of (v. Leng.) is excluded. But is interpreted differently. Hvernick, Maurer, and others understand it of going forth to war; only we must not then think (with Maurer) of the war against the prince of Persia. “For he will do that even now (in the third year of Cyrus), and at this time the coming of the prince of Grecia has no meaning” (Hitzig). Hofmann and Hitzig understand, therefore, , in contrast to , of a going forth from the conflict, as in 2Ki 11:7 “they shall go forth on the Sabbath” is placed over against “that enter in on the Sabbath” in 2Ki 11:5; but in an entirely different sense. Hitzig thus renders the clause: “when I have done with the Persians, and am on the point of departing, then shall the king of Grecia rise up against me.” must then be the Seleucidan kingdom, and the the guardian spirit of Egypt – suppositions which need no refutation, while the interpretation of the words themselves fails by the arbitrary interpolation “against me” after . According to Hofmann, the angel says that “he had to return and contend further with the prince of the people of Persia; and that when he has retired from this conflict, then shall the prince of the Grecian people come, compelling him to enter on a new war.” This last clause Hofmann thus more fully illustrates: “Into the conflict with the prince of the people of Persia, which the angel retires from, the prince of the Grecian people enters, and against him he resumes it after that the Persian kingdom has fallen, and is then also helped by Michael, the prince of the Jewish people, in this war against the prince of Grecia, as he had been in the war against the prince of Persia” ( Schriftbew. i. pp. 333, 334f.). But Hitzig and Kliefoth have, in opposition to this, referred to the incongruity which lies in the thought that the prince of Javan shall enter into the war of the angel against the Persians, and assume and carry it forward. The angel fights against the demon of Persia, not to destroy the Persians, but to influence the Persian king in favour of the people of God; on the contrary, the prince of Javan comes to destroy the Persian king. According to this, we cannot say that the prince of Javan enters into the place of the angel in the war. “The Grecians and the Persians much rather stand,” as Hitzig rightly remarks, “on one side, and are adversaries of Michael and our ,” i.e., of the angel who spake to Daniel. Add to this, that although , to go out, means also to go away, to go off, yet the meaning to go away from the conflict, to abandon it, is not confirmed: much rather , sensu militari , always denotes only “to go out, forth, into the conflict;” cf. 1Sa 8:20; 1Sa 23:15; 1Ch 20:1; Job 39:21, etc. We have to take the word in this signification here (with C. B. Michaelis, Klief., and Kran.), only we must not, with Kranichfeld, supply the clause, “to another more extensive conflict,” because this supplement is arbitrary, but rather, with Kliefoth, interpret the word generally as it stands of the going out of the angel to fight for the people of God, without excluding the war with the prince of Persia, or limiting it to this war. Thus the following will be the meaning of the passage: Now shall I return to resume and continue the war with the prince of Persia, to maintain the position gained (Dan 10:13) beside the kings of Persia; but when (while) I thus go forth to war, i.e., while I carry on this conflict, lo, the prince of Javan shall come ( with the partic. of the future) – then shall there be a new conflict. This last thought is not, it is true, expressly uttered, but it appears from Dan 10:21. The warring with the prince, i.e., the spirit of Persia hostile to Israel, refers to the oppositions which the Jews would encounter in the hindrances put in the way of their building the temple from the time of Cyrus to the time of Darius Hystaspes, and further under Xerxes and Artaxerxes till the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem by Nehemiah, as well as at a later time on the side of the Persian world-power, in the midst of all which difficulties the Angel of the Lord promises to guide the affairs of His people. is the spirit of the Macedonian world-kingdom, which would arise and show as great hostility as did the spirit of Persia against the people of God.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
The angel appears here to lead the Prophet in vain through a winding course; for he might directly and simply have told him why he had come. It was necessary to recall the Prophet to his senses, as he was at one time scarcely master of his actions. He was not indeed permanently injured in his mind, but the disturbance of feeling through which he had passed had temporarily disarranged the calmness of his thoughts. This event both occurred and is narrated for our advantage. This is the reason why the angel again uses this preface, Dost thee know? as if he wished to gather together the Prophet’s senses which were formerly wandering and dispersed. He urges him to pay great attention. And now, says he, I will return; that is, after I shall have explained to thee what thou wilt afterwards hear, I will return again to contend with the prince of the Persians. Here the angel indicates the reason for the delay of his mission, not because God neglected the groans and prayers of his Prophet, but the fit time had not yet arrived. The angel had formerly stated how the Persian prince had stood before him; meaning, he detained me, and I was obliged to enter into conflict with him, for his cruelty to the people had become far more formidable and insolent. This is the account which he gives of his occupation. But he now adds, I will return to fight with the prince of the Persians; implying, God sent me purposely to unfold to thee future occurrences, but you now know how far I was from being at leisure or shall be hereafter. I now come to be God’s witness and herald of his good will towards thyself and thy people. In reality, I am the defender of thy safety, since I have constantly to fight for thee with the prince of the Persians. He means Cambyses. I follow my former interpretation of an engagement between the angel and the king of Persia, whom wicked men had stimulated to cruelty; for he had revoked the edict of his father. The angel resisted the king’s fury, who was naturally very turbulent, and profane writers have described his character in a similar way.
He now adds, I will go to fight against the prince of the Persians; for עם, gnem, has the force of “against” here and in many other passages. He next adds, And when I shall depart, that is, when I am gone, the prince of Greece shall approach, says he; that is, God shall exercise him in another way. He does not mean this to refer to Cambyses, but to other Persian kings, as we shall state in the proper place. It is quite correct to suppose the king of Macedon to have arrived by God’s permission; but the angel simply means to state the existence of various methods by which God hinders the cruelty of kings whenever they attempt to injure his people. He shall send the prince of the Greeks, says he. God, therefore, thus restrained Cambyses by the angel’s assistance, and then he protected his people from the cruelty exercised by Alexander, king of Macedon. God is always providing for the safety of his people, and always has a variety of methods in operation. The angel desired to teach us this with all simplicity. At length he adds: —
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(20) Then said he.The meaning of this verse is obscure. Apparently the person who is speaking refers back to what he had said (Dan. 10:12-14); and from the question Knowest thou? &c., we are to infer that Daniel was perfectly aware of the reasons which caused him to come, viz., to make thee understand what shall befal thy people in the latter days. But before he proceeds to make this revelation, he prepares Daniels mind for a portion of what is about to be revealed, by mentioning the spiritual powers which ruled over Greece. I shall return to fight, referring to the Providence which watched over Israel during the Persian sovereignty; but while I am gone forth (the word being used in a military sense, as in Jos. 14:11) the prince of Javan will come, this word being also used in a hostile sense. The prophet is in this manner prepared for troublous times, which shall occur under the Macedonian supremacy.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
20. Gabriel, “the angel of prophecy” (Ewald), recalls to the mind of the strengthened prophet that he had come for the sake of unveiling the future of Israel in answer to his prayer (note Dan 10:2; Dan 10:14), and adds that after giving this revelation he must return to do his part in carrying it out by continuing the fight with the “spirit” of Persia. (See note Dan 10:13.) Daniel is distinctly said to have received this vision during the Persian supremacy (Dan 10:1), and he is now told that the empire which shall follow the Persian will be the Grecian.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
.1 ‘Then he said to me, “Do you know why I have come to you? And now I will return to fight with the prince of Persia, and when I go, lo, the prince of Greece will come. But I will tell you what is inscribed in the writing of truth, and there is none who makes himself strong with me against these, but Michael your prince. And as for me, in the first year of Darius the Mede I stood up to confirm and strengthen him.”
The question is rhetorical to make him think of the vision to come. But first it is necessary for Daniel to know that behind all that is said powerful beings are at work bringing about God’s purposes, and powerful beings are at work seeking to thwart them. Once he has finished speaking with Daniel this mighty angel will return to the battle against the prince of Persia. And this will later be followed by a battle against the prince of Greece. For as the previous visions, and the one to come, are fulfilled on earth, these battles will be taking place in heavenly places.
Both the prince of Persia and the prince of Greece are Satan’s minions, seeking to shape the history of Persia and Greece to their will to ensure that they continually behave as brute beasts. But the mighty angel and the even mightier Michael are at work thwarting those purposes. Thus they will aid the struggling returned exiles, they will aid in the building of the temple and the thwarting of the enemies of the project, they will aid Nehemiah in defending the city and building its walls, they will aid the people of God in the activities of the kings of the north and the kings of the south, and will aid the fight against Antiochus, for they are the angels who support the people of God unseen. Why it was they who had strengthened and sustained activities while Darius the Mede was on the throne of Babylon in his first year. This probably refers to the restoration of the temple vessels to the exiles and the assistance with their return against all difficulties.
And now that he realises this Daniel can learn what is written in the writing of truth, the heavenly record of what is to happen in the days to come with regard to those peoples who surround and affect the people of God (as described in chapter 11), for he is now aware of those who stand firm for the people of God.
‘There is none who makes himself strong with me against these, but Michael your prince.’ To make himself strong means that he as it were girds on his armour and arms himself, and gathers his followers, in order to support his fellow angel. The negative is probably speaking about the leaders. Both he and Michael are probably to be seen as having legions of angels under their control. ‘Michael your prince’ (compare Dan 12:1 where he is ‘the great prince who stands for the children of your people’) suggests that it is Michael who especially watches over the people of God. Because they are responsive to God no Satanic angel can be their prince (this of course applies to the ‘ideal’ or true people of God. Many Jews who were not really the people of God would be influenced by, indeed had already been influenced by, Satanic angels).
For in the end all God’s promises are to His true and responsive people. The Jews also recognised this. Each group saw themselves as really representing the people of God. There was a strange ambivalence about their views. The Pharisees could see the Sadducees as fellow Israelites, and as rightly participating in temple rites, but they also saw them as in some sense not true Jews at all and as, at the most, doubtful recipients of eternal life.
Excursus on the Princes of Persia and Greece and Suchlike.
It should first be noted that that great man of prayer, Daniel, was not called on to battle with the prince of Persia or Greece in any way. The battling was to be left in the hands of the angel visitant and Michael the Archangel. Daniel was to deal with the earthly side of things by means of the word and prayer. Heavenly conflict was to be left to heavenly beings. If we do otherwise we transgress the bounds that God has laid down.
We are reminded by Jude of those angels who ‘kept not their own principality, but left their proper habitation’ and in that context he spoke of those men who ‘set at nought dominion and rail at dignities (‘glorious beings’), whereas Michael the Archangel, when contending with the Devil — dare not bring against him a railing judgment but said “The Lord rebuke you”. But these rail at whatever things they know not.’ This was a stern warning that men should not step outside the bounds that God has set. Men should not seek to ‘take on’ the ‘heavenly’ forces of evil, or commune with them in any way, although they must resist their activities against men by the word of God and prayer.
2 Peter backs this up sternly speaking of those who ‘walk after the flesh in the lust of defilement and despise dominion. Daring, self-willed, they do not tremble at railing at glorious beings, whereas angels, though greater in might and power, do not bring a railing judgment against them before the Lord’ (2Pe 2:10-11). If even angels have to beware when dealing with the spirit forces of evil, how much more men. Yet, says Peter, there are some foolish enough to try. That is not to say that we should live in fear of them. Through Christ we have certain protection, but only while we do not overstep the bound between the physical and spirit world.
It is, of course, true that where evil angels/spirits/devils do impinge on human territory, seeking to influence their minds and turn men from the true way, they are to be battled with, but this is by taking on the armour of God, by the right use of the word of God, and through righteousness, both imputed from Christ and revealed in life (Eph 6:10-18). We note in that passage that we are to stand firm (Dan 10:14 compare Eph 4:27), not to take the battle to the enemy. It is the battle for the mind, the battle against spiritual blindness and temptation. We resist him by being ‘subject to God’ (Jas 4:11). All this is to do with ‘the wiles of the Devil’ and we are reminded above that he is not to be treated lightly.
When Christians battle against such forces it is on an ‘earthly’ basis. Then ‘the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but mighty before God to the casting down of strongholds, casting down imaginations (reasonings, often false), and every high thing that is exalted against the knowledge of God, and bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ’ (2Co 10:4-5). In other words God enables us through the word and prayer to open men’s eyes, to remove the blindness brought about by the god of this world (2Co 4:4), to win the battle for the hearts and minds of men. But if we seek to take the battle against ‘heavenly’ beings into a higher sphere apart from this, both Jude and Peter say that we do very foolishly.
Fortunately the Devil has been bound and is restricted by God (Mar 3:27; Rev 20:3) which is why his power is limited, but not so limited that Michael dared attack him directly. These descriptions of his being limited and restricted are to comfort us in our defensive battle against him. They are pictorial and not to be taken literally. Satan is a spirit being and cannot be bound by a physical chain or in a physical place. Thus he is at the same time restricted by God, and yet prowls around like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour (1Pe 5:8), revealed through the activities of persecutors (Dan 10:9 with Dan 4:12-16).
Note how as in Daniel it is Satan’s effects in this world that we battle against, not directly Satan himself. That is to be left to greater than us (Rev 12:7). Jesus nowhere taught His disciples to enter into such conflicts. They were only to call on Christ’s name against the Enemy when he had sought to interfere in human affairs by possession.
End of Excursus.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Dan 10:20. To fight, &c. To withstand the prince of Persia.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Dan 10:20 Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come.
Ver. 20. Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? ] q.d., I told thee that before, Dan 10:14 and I look thou shouldst remember it.
I will return to fight with the prince of Persia.
And when I am gone forth,
Lo, the prince of Grecia.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Dan 10:20
Dan 10:20 Then saidH559 he, KnowestH3045 thou whereforeH4100 I comeH935 untoH413 thee? and nowH6258 will I returnH7725 to fightH3898 withH5973 the princeH8269 of Persia:H6539 and when IH589 am gone forth,H3318 lo,H2009 the princeH8269 of GreciaH3120 shall come.H935
Dan 10:20
“Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come.”
This is a difficult translation here to understand. The New King James Version renders it thus: “Then he said, “Do you know why I have come to you? And now I must return to fight with the prince of Persia; and when I have gone forth, indeed the prince of Greece will come.”
Daniel’s heavenly visitor asks him a question here. He already told Daniel why he was there as recorded in Dan 10:12; Dan 10:14. He came because Daniel requested it, and to help Daniel understand what would befall his people in the latter days. Evidently Daniel’s heavenly visitor is making sure Daniel understands what is happening to him and what the purpose of this vision is.
This heavenly visitor’s presence is required back to the conflict from which he left in order to make this visit to Daniel. Obviously this prince of Persia is a force standing against the forces of light in that a conflict with the heavenly visitor is mentioned. Whether this prince of Persia is a flesh and blood prince or an evil spiritual force dedicated to the furtherance of all opposition against the people of God, we can only speculate. If this prince of Persia is a malignant spiritual force, then so is the prince of Greece. So we have two separate forces of evil in opposition to the forces of light.
Obviously when this heavenly visitor returns, the prince of Persia is going to be put down and then the prince of Greece will arise and join in the conflict. I am persuaded that these princes are evil spiritual beings simply for the fact that if they were physical, it wouldn’t be much of a fight. The text seems to suggest quite the extended struggle with difficulties associated with it. This fact is also significant and compelling evidence against this heavenly visitor being an epiphany of Jesus Christ. I have got to believe that if Jesus Christ Himself were heading up this spiritual confrontation, we would not see the evidence we see here of the difficulties associated with the conflict. This fact alone is what prevents me from affirming without reservation that this heavenly visitor was indeed an incarnation of Jesus Christ Himself.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
to fight: Dan 10:13, Isa 37:36, Act 12:23
the prince of Grecia: Dan 7:6, Dan 8:5-8, Dan 8:21, Dan 11:2-4
Reciprocal: Gen 32:2 – God’s Num 24:24 – Chittim Eze 27:13 – Javan Dan 2:39 – another third Zec 1:11 – We
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Dan 10:20. The angel asked Daniel if he knew or understood why he had come to him. There is no recorded answer to the question that is available to us. but the absence of everything to the contrary implies that he understood. Thus the subject or occasion of the present meeting between Daniel and the angel was dropped, and the latter informed the prophet that he was going back to Persia to resume the controversy that is mentioned in verse 13. He added a general reference to another great event that was to occur between Persia and Greece after this angel lias conducted his fight with the former. But this item is out of place chronologically and Jt will be treated in its proper place in the next chapter.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Dan 10:20. Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? Or, Thou knowest for what cause I am come, &c. The angel, having strengthened the prophet, presumes that he also understood the general design of his errand. The Greek is, , Surely thou knowest, according to a usual Hebrew idiom. And now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia With the evil angel, who, under the god of this world, presides over Persia; or rather, with the present ruling prince of Persia, whether Cambyses or any other person then intrusted with the chief power, whose designs against the Jews this angel was employed in counteracting, and would continue to counteract, as also those of every future prince of that kingdom, till it should be overturned by the Greeks. And when I am gone forth Hebrew, , and I going forth, namely, to execute my commission; or, when I am gone forth, having executed it, and their monarchy is brought down for their unkindness to the Jews, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come The Macedonian empire, under Alexander the Great and his successors, shall be established in Asia; and though favourable to the Jews at first, as the Persian was, yet will afterward become vexatious to them. Such is the state of the church militant; when it has got clear of one enemy, it has another to encounter; and such a hydras head is that of the old serpent; when one storm is blown over, it is not long before another rises. Henry.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
10:20 Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the {p} prince of Grecia shall come.
(p) Meaning that he would not only himself bridle the rage of Cambyses, but also the other kings of Persia by Alexander the King of Macedonia.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The angel asked if Daniel knew why he had come to him. He apparently did this to focus the prophet’s attention on the vision to follow, and since Daniel was quite weak.
The angel informed Daniel that he had to return to resume fighting against the demon who was influencing Persia (Dan 10:13), and then battle the one that would be influencing Greece. The prince of Greece may be a reference to Alexander the Great. [Note: Feinberg, p. 145.] Persia and Greece, of course, are two of the kingdoms that have been the focus of prophecy in this book (chs. 2; 7; 8; 9; Dan 11:2-35).
"From this we can learn that, behind the many details of prophecy relating to the history of this period, there is the unseen struggle between angelic forces that the will of God may be accomplished." [Note: Walvoord, Daniel . . ., p. 250.]