36<\/strong>. according to his will<\/em> ] as Dan 8:4<\/span>, Dan 11:3<\/span> (of Alexander); Dan 11:16<\/span> (of Antiochus the Great).<\/p>\n magnify himself<\/em> ] Isa 10:15<\/span>. So Dan 11:37<\/em><\/span>.<\/p>\n above every god<\/em> ] Antiochus acquired a reputation for piety among the Greeks by his splendid presents to temples (cf. on Dan 11:24<\/em><\/span>); but by the manner in which he patronized, and selected for honour, particular deities (as Zeus Olympios, or Jupiter Capitolinus), he might be said, especially from an Israelitish point of view, to set himself above them all.<\/p>\n Antiochus, moreover, assumed divine honours. This is particularly evident, as Babelon has pointed out [386] , on his coins. His best portraits appear to be those on the coins of his early years, which bear simply the inscription ‘King Antiochus.’ At a later period of his reign a star appears on his forehead, implying that he has assumed divine honours. Then in coins with the legend, ‘King Antiochus, God’ (or ‘God Manifest’ [Epiphanes]), the star disappears, but the portrait is idealized, the features approximating in type to those of Apollo. Other coins of the same type exhibit the head surrounded by a diadem with rays, another mark of divine rank [387] . Lastly, on coins with the legend ‘King Antiochus, God Manifest, Victory-bearer,’ the head approximates even to that of Zeus Olympios, whose distinctive epithet (‘Victory-bearer’) the king himself assumes, see also the evidence collected from inscriptions by E. R. Bevan, Journ. of Hellenic Studies<\/em>, 1900, pp. 26 30, respecting the worship of the Seleucidae in different cities of the East. See the accompanying Plate.<\/p>\n [386] In the instructive Introduction to Les Rois de Syrie<\/em> (Catalogue of Coins in the National Library at Paris), 1891, p. xcii iv.<\/p>\n [387] Babelon states that Antiochus Epiphanes is the first Seleucid king who is represented constantly on his coins with a crown of rays.<\/p>\n and against the God of gods<\/em> (the God of Israel: cf. Dan 2:47<\/span>) he shall speak marvellous things<\/em> ] i.e. extraordinary impieties: cf. (also of Antiochus) Dan 7:8<\/span> ‘a mouth speaking great things,’ 25 ‘shall speak words against the Most High.’<\/p>\n until indignation be accomplished<\/em> ] or, be finished, exhausted<\/strong>, i.e. until God’s wrath on Israel has worked itself out. The words are borrowed from Isa 10:25<\/span>. For ‘accomplished,’ see also Eze 5:13<\/span>; Eze 6:12<\/span>; Eze 7:8<\/span>; Eze 13:15<\/span>; Eze 20:8<\/span>; Eze 20:21<\/span>.<\/p>\n for that that is determined shall be done<\/em> ] the Divine decree must take effect. The expression, as in Dan 9:27<\/span> (where see the note), from Isa 10:23<\/span>.<\/p>\n 36 39<\/strong>. The presumptuousness and impiety of Antiochus. Many of the older expositors supposed that at this point there was a transition from Antiochus to the future Antichrist, and that Dan 11:36-45<\/em><\/span> related exclusively to the latter; but whatever typical significance might be legitimately considered to attach to the character and career of Antiochus as a whole<\/em>, it is contrary to all sound principles of exegesis to suppose that, in a continuous<\/em> description, with no indication whatever of a change of subject, part should refer to one person, and part to another, and that ‘the king’ of Dan 11:36<\/em><\/span>, and ‘the king of the south’ of Dan 11:45<\/em><\/span> should be a different king from the one whose doings are described in Dan 11:21-35<\/em><\/span>. The fact that traits in the N.T. figure of Antichrist are suggested (apparently) by the description in Dan 11:36-39<\/em><\/span>, does not authorize the inference that these verses themselves refer to Antichrist (cf. the Introd. p. xcvii).<\/p>\n And the king shall do according to his will – <\/B>Shall be absolute and supreme, and shall accomplish his purposes. This refers, it seems to me, beyond question, to Antiochus Epiphanes, and was exactly fulfilled in him. He accomplished his purposes in regard to the city and temple in the most arbitrary manner, and was, in every respect, an absolute despot. It should be said, however, here, that most Christian interpreters suppose that the allusion here to Antiochus ceases, and that henceforward, it refers to Antichrist. So Jerome, Gill, Bp. Newton, and others; and so Jerome says many of the Jews understood it. The only reason alleged for this is, that there are things affirmed here of the king which could not be true of Antiochus. But, in opposition to this, it may be observed<\/P> (a) that the allusion in the previous verses is undoubtedly to Antiochus Epiphanes.<\/P> (b) There is no indication of any change, for the prophetic narrative seems to proceed as if the allusion to the same person continued.<\/P> (c) The word king is not a word to be applied to Antichrist, it being nowhere used of him.<\/P> (d) Such a transition, without anymore decided marks of it, would not be in accordance with the usual method in the prophetic writings, leaving a plain prediction in the very midst of the description, and passing on at once to a representation of one who would arise after many hundreds of years, and of whom the former could be considered as in no way the type. The most obvious and honest way, therefore, of interpreting this is, to refer it to Antiochus, and perhaps we shall find that the difficulty of applying it to him is not insuperable.<\/P> And he shall exalt himself – <\/B>No one can doubt that this will agree with Antiochus Epiphanes – a proud, haughty, absolute, and stern monarch, the purpose of whose reign was to exalt himself, and to extend the limits of his empire.<\/P> And magnify himself above every god – <\/B>That is, by directing what gods should or should not be worshipped; attempting to displace the claim of all those who were worshipped as gods at his pleasure, and establishing the worship of other gods in their place. Thus he assumed the right to determine what god should be worshipped in Jerusalem, abolishing the worship of Jehovah, and setting up that of Jupiter Olympius in the stead; and so throughout his whole dominion, by a proclamation, he forbade the worship of any god but his, 1 Macc. 1:44-51; Jos. Ant. b. xii. ch. v. Section 4, 5. One who assumes or claims the right to forbid the adoration of any particular god, and to order divine homage to be rendered to anyone which he chooses, exalts himself above the gods, as he in this way denies the right which they must be supposed to claim to prescribe their own worship.<\/P> And shall speak marvelous things – <\/B>The Hebrew word <\/span> np<\/I>e<\/I><\/SUP>la’oth<\/I> would properly denote things wonderful, or fitted to excite astonishment; things that are unusual and extraordinary: and the meaning here is, that the things spoken would be so impious and atrocious – so amazing and wonderful for their wickedness, as to produce amazement.<\/P> Against the God of gods – <\/B>The true God, Jehovah; he is supreme, and is superior to all that is called God, or that is worshipped as such. Nothing could be better descriptive of Antiochus than this; nothing was ever more strikingly fulfilled than this was in him.<\/P> And shall prosper until the indignation be accomplished – <\/B>Referring still to the fact that there was an appointed time during which this was to continue. That time might well be called a time of indignation, for the Lord seemed to be angry against his temple and people, and suffered this pagan king to pour out his wrath without measure against the temple, the city, and the whole land.<\/P> For that that is determined shall be done – <\/B>What is purposed in regard to the city and temple, and to all other things, must be accomplished. Compare Dan 10:21<\/span>. The angel here states a general truth – that all that God has ordained will come to pass. The application of this truth here is, that the series of events must be suffered to run on, and that it could not be expected that they would be arrested until all that had been determined in the Divine mind should be effected. They who would suffer, therefore, in those times must wait with patience until the Divine purposes should be brought about, and when the period should arrive, the calamities would cease.<\/P><\/p>\n Dan 11:36-45<\/span><\/p>\n And the King shall do according to his will.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n The Reign of the Antichrist<\/strong><\/p>\n We Christians look for an Antichrist yet to come. Apart from revelation, it is, in itself, in conformity with human nature, and the laws of things, that, as good intensifies to a grand consummation of good, so will evil also intensify the grand consummation of evil. The world is made up of light and shadow, the one always accompanying the other; and as the light increases the shadows deepen; till, when the king of glory comes to crown and establish the good, he will be confronted with the King and head of all wickedness, wrought up to the summit of lawlessness and blasphemy at which its doom shall come. In the Old Testament, wherever we look we find some image and fore-intimation of this great evil power, running parallel with the predictions and promises concerning the seed of the Woman, and the Messiah of the chosen people. It was the firm belief of all the Christian Fathers that there is yet to come a development and impersonation of Antichristianism more dreadful than has ever yet been seen on Earth, and which shall be destroyed only in the great day of God Almighty. This Antichrist is described in the passage of Daniel now before us. Whoever this King may be, or from whatever quarter he may come, he is the last representative of the bestial world power that ever bears rule upon earth. Whoever he is, he is some individual person. .. <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Verse 36. And the king shall do according to his will<\/B><\/I>] This may apply to Antiochus<\/I>, who exalted himself above every god, called himself a god, sported with all religion, profaned the temple, c., c. But others think an antichristian power<\/I> in the Church is intended for in the language of this prophecy king<\/I> is taken for power<\/I>, a kingdom<\/I>, c. That such a power did spring up in the Church that acted in an arbitrary manner against all laws, human and Divine, is well known. This power showed itself in the Greek<\/I> emperors<\/I> in the east<\/I>, and in the bishops of Rome<\/I> in the west<\/I>. And this is to continue.<\/P> <\/P> Till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is<\/B><\/I> <\/B>determined shall be done.<\/B><\/I>] This is the same as what was called in Da 8:19<\/span>, the last end of the indignation<\/I> and Da 9:27<\/span>, the consummation<\/I> and means the end<\/I> or consummation<\/I> of God’s indignation against the Jews. And this seems more clearly expressed, Da 12:7<\/span>: “When he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people.” We see this still subsisting in the Church of Rome; and it was a saying of Rabbi David Kimchi<\/I>, “When Rome shall be laid waste, then shall be redemption for Israel.” For the destruction of Rome and the restoration of the Jews shall fall out about the same time.-Bp. Newton<\/I>.<\/P> <\/p>\n The king, i.e. the Roman government, whether by the senate, or by emperors, or by the bishop of Rome, who shall shove out the imperial power not only from Rome, but from Italy and all the western empire, as far as he could, by striking in with the barbarous nations that invaded it, who are called ten kings. Read for all this Rev 17:10-13<\/span>, as all the seven or eight governments of Rome are called horns, and the horns kings, Dan 11:10<\/span>,11<\/span>. The sum is this: Though it is granted some of these things are applicable to Antiochus, yet the angel speaks of him here and henceforward but by the by and very lightly; his main scope is antichrist, as will appear in the interpretation. <\/P> Shall do according to his will; Antiochus did according to his will: he shall be arbitrary in his actions, notwithstanding any checks of Divine and human laws: the cause follows. <\/P> Shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods: this is true of the Romans, who would deify what they please, and defy it or ungod it; most true of the persecutors of Christ and Christians in the time of the emperors, but most notoriously of the Roman antichrist. See how this agrees with that prophecy, 2Th 2:3-10<\/span>; Rev 17:3<\/span>. <\/P> And shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished; then shall antichrist continue long and prevail; read for this, Re 13<\/span>. <\/P> For that that is determined shall be done; that which God hath decreed to be done by him against the saints shall be done, and that which God hath purposed to be done upon him shall be executed also to his destruction. <\/P> <\/p>\n 36.<\/B> The wilful king here, thoughprimarily Antiochus, is antitypically and mainly Antichrist, theseventh head of the seven-headed and ten-horned beast of Re13:1-18<\/span>, and the “beast” of Armageddon (Rev 16:13<\/span>;Rev 16:16<\/span>; Rev 19:19<\/span>).Some identify him with the revived French emperorship, the eighthhead of the beast (Re 17:11<\/span>),who is to usurp the kingly, as the Pope has the priestly, dignity ofChristthe false Messiah of the Jews, who will “plant histabernacle between the seas in the holy mountain,” “exaltinghimself above every god” (2Th 2:4<\/span>;Rev 13:5<\/span>; Rev 13:6<\/span>).This last clause only in part holds good of Antiochus; for though heassumed divine honors, identifying himself with Jupiter Olympius, yetit was for that god he claimed them; still it applies to him as thetype.<\/I> <\/P> speak marvellous thingsagainst . . . God of gods<\/B>so Da7:25<\/span>, as to the “little horn,” which seeminglyidentifies the two (compare Da8:25<\/span>). Antiochus forbade the worship of Jehovah by a decree”marvellous” for its wickedness: thus he was a type ofAntichrist. Compare Da 7:8<\/span>, “amouth speaking great things.” <\/P> indignation . . .accomplished<\/B>God’s visitation of wrath on the Jews for theirsins (Da 8:19<\/span>). <\/P> that . . . determined<\/B>(Dan 9:26<\/span>; Dan 9:27<\/span>;Dan 10:21<\/span>).<\/P><\/p>\n And the king shall do according to his will<\/strong>,…. Not Antiochus, for he could not do as he would, being curbed by the Romans, as has been observed; and there are many things which follow that cannot be applied to him; rather the Roman people, under the name of a king or kingdom, rising up to universal monarchy, upon the decline of the Grecian empire, are meant; and who did what they would, subdued kingdoms at pleasure, and gave laws to the whole world; and particularly in the little horn, or Rome Papal, antichrist, Da 7:8<\/span>, of which Antiochus was a type, and is called by the same name, Da 8:9<\/span> and the transition is easy from the type to the antitype, with whom everything said agrees: for the pope of Rome, claiming infallibility, does, or has done, whatsoever he pleases; regarding neither the laws of God nor man, but dispensing with both at his pleasure; coining new doctrines; appointing new ordinances; setting himself up above councils and princes; taking upon him a power to depose kings and set them up as he pleases; with many other things done by him in an arbitrary and despotic way, both civil and religious; and with none does the character agree as with him, as well as what follows:<\/p>\n and magnify himself above every god<\/strong>; that is so called, whether angels whom he commands, or the kings of the earth he claims an authority over, those gods in heaven, and gods on earth; which is the exact description of antichrist, as given by the apostle, who has manifestly a reference to this passage, [See comments on 2Th 2:4]<\/span>,<\/p>\n and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods<\/strong>; the true God, to whom angels and civil magistrates are subject, being his creatures, and acting under him; but such is the arrogance of the man of sin, that he takes upon him to speak against God, and such things as are astonishing; and it may be extremely wondered at that he should dare to speak them, as to call himself God on earth; to take such things to himself, which only belong to God, as by claiming all power in heaven, earth, and hell; power to bind the consciences of men, and impose what he pleases on them; to make new articles of faith; to pardon the sins of men; to open and shut the gates of heaven when he pleases; with other blasphemies against God, his mouth, given him to speak, utters; see Re 13:5<\/span>:<\/p>\n and shall prosper until the indignation be accomplished<\/strong>; the wrath of God upon the Jewish nation for their rejection of the Messiah; until the time of their conversion is come; and then antichrist shall be destroyed, to make way for it; till that time he shall prosper and flourish, more or less, until the 1260 days or years are ended, the date of his reign, Re 11:2<\/span>:<\/p>\n for that that is determined shall be done<\/strong>; all the decrees and purposes of God shall be accomplished; all respecting the state and condition of the people of God under antichrist, particularly the people of the Jews, and concerning the reign and ruin of antichrist.<\/p>\n The Hostile King Exalting Himself above All Divine and Human Ordinances at the Time of the End – Dan 11:36-39<\/span><\/p>\n This exaltation of the king is here introduced by the formula , which expresses the self-will and the irresistible might of his proceeding; cf. Dan 3:16<\/span> and Dan 8:4<\/span> – ”a feature common to Antiochus and Antichrist” (Klief.). He shall raise himself above every god, not merely “subjectively in his lofty imagination” (Hitzig), but also by his actions. , every god<\/em>, not merely the God of Israel, but also the gods of the heathen. This does not agree with Antiochus. The which is said of him, 2 Macc. 9:12, is not an exalting of himself above every god. “Antiochus was not an ; he even wished to render the worship of Zeus universal; and that he once spoiled the temple does not imply his raising himself above every god” (Klief.). Of Antiochus much rather, as is said by Livy (41:20), in duabus tamen magnis honestisque rebus fere regius erat animus, in urbium donis et deorum cultu <\/em>. On the contrary, these words before us are expressly referred to Antichrist, 2Th 2:4<\/span>.<\/p>\n Yet further, in his arrogance he shall speak , wonderful, i.e., impious and astonishing things, against the God of gods, i.e., the true God. This clause expounds and strengthens the ( speaking great things<\/em>), which is said of the enemy at the time of the end, Dan 7:8<\/span>, Dan 7:11<\/span>, Dan 7:20<\/span>. In this he will prosper, but only till the anger of God against His people ( as Dan 8:19<\/span>) shall be accomplished. Regarding see at Dan 9:27<\/span>. This anger of God is irrevocably determined ( ), that His people may be wholly purified for the consummation of His kingdom in glory. The perf<\/em>. does not stand for the imperf<\/em>. because it is decreed, but in its proper meaning, according to which it represents the matter as finished, settled. Here it accordingly means: “for that which is irrevocably decreed is accomplished, is not to be recalled, but must be done.”<\/p>\n THE “LITTLE HORN” AND THE END TIME <\/strong><\/p>\n Verses 36-45:<\/p>\n Verse 36<\/strong> begins a description of the “little-king-horn” of Dan 7:8<\/span> that arises out of or from among the “ten horns,” ten royal rulers of the final Gentile one world government in disarray. Out of the confederacy of these Gentile <\/strong>kings, whether exactly 10 in number, or the number ten is used figuratively to represent heathen governments in disarray against God may not be known. But this king <\/strong>is the “little horn” royal ruler that is to rise from among the confederacy.<\/p>\n He will do with strength <\/strong>whatever he wants to do, exalting himself and magnifying himself, causing himself to appear “head and shoulders” above every god! Dan 7:8<\/span>; Dan 9:27<\/span>; Dan 12:11<\/span>; 2Th 2:4<\/span>; Revelation ch. 13.<\/p>\n It is foretold <\/strong>that he will speak blasphemous things, shocking things, against the God (living God) of gods, Rev 13:5-6<\/span>; Rev 13:11-12<\/span>; 2Th 2:4<\/span>; Dan 7:8<\/span>; Dan 7:25<\/span>. In this course of behavior he will prosper politically till the indignation, (God’s judgment against the Jews for their sins) is completed or fulfilled. For what is determined or prophetically decreed shall be done, Psa 119:160<\/span>; Dan 8:19<\/span>; Dan 9:26-27<\/span>; Dan 10:21<\/span>.<\/p>\n Verse 37 adds <\/strong>that this Devil-incited “little horn,” royal “king-god,” will not regard or respect <\/strong>the trinitarian God of his fathers, indicating that he is an infidel Jew. Nor will he regard or respect the “desire of women,” to be mothers with view to fulfillment of the promised “seed of the woman,” Gen 3:15<\/span>; Gen 30:23<\/span>; Luk 1:25<\/span>; Luk 1:28<\/span>; Nor would he regard or respect any god, making a god of himself, worshipping himself, and causing men to do the same, much as did Nebuchadnezzar and Antiochus Epiphanes, symbols of the antichrist, Dan 3:4-6<\/span>; 2Th 2:4<\/span>; Rev 13:4<\/span>; Rev 13:8<\/span>; Rev 13:12<\/span>; Rev 13:15<\/span>; Isa 14:11<\/span>; Luk 18:14<\/span>.<\/p>\n Verse 40 foretells <\/strong>that at the end of the “little horn” royal reign, or as it draws near, the king of the south, (the Arabs of Egypt) will push at or approach him in battle. At the same time the king of the north (Turks) will come down against him, like a whirlwind (unexpectedly) as an army of the growing Roman kingdom, with chariots, horsemen, and, many ships, a large fleet, and he (Antiochus Epiphanes or his successors), symbol of the antichrist, shall enter into the countries of Asia, and overrun them, darting right and left in confusion, all the way into Egypt.<\/p>\n Verse 41 states <\/strong>that “he shall enter also into the glorious land, the land of Palestine,” and by him this northern Turkish ruler, succeeding Antiochus, many countries shall be conquered. But three countries shall escape his hand, Edom, Moab, <\/strong>and the chief of the children of Ammon, <\/strong>all kinsmen of the Arabs who too were offspring of Abraham, Gen 16:12<\/span>; Isa 11:13<\/span>; Isa 11:15<\/span>.<\/p>\n Verses 42, 43<\/strong> add that this Gentile ruler shall also extend his armed power of aggression upon the countries so that Egypt will not escape. For he will gain power over the treasures of gold, silver, and all the precious things of Egypt. And the steps of this final Gentile, heathen, world ruler will also be the Libyans and the Ethiopians, as allies or vassal countries following him, Exo 11:8<\/span>; Jdg 4:10<\/span>.<\/p>\n Verse 44 states <\/strong>that tidings, messages, reports from the east and the north shall frustrate him (the little horn ruler). He shall respond with fury, sending forth armies to utterly destroy, wipe out, or liquidate those who dared lead any rebellion against his Empire reign.<\/p>\n Verse 45 foretells <\/strong>that (for self-worship) he will plant, set, or establish the place of his tabernacles of worship (self-worship) between the sea (the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean Sea) and the glorious holy mountain (Mt Moriah) Jerusalem and Mt Zion, Deu 12:5<\/span>, where the Jewish Temple is. It is added that, in spite of this, he shall come to his end (just retribution) Psa 37:38<\/span>, and none shall help him, as a self-proclaimed god; Revelation 13 th Ch., Joh 5:43<\/span>; Isa 14:13<\/span>; Dan 7:26<\/span>.<\/p>\n This passage is very obscure, and has consequently been explained in very opposite ways by interpreters. And whatever is obscure, is usually doubtful, and there would be little utility and no termination, if I were to narrate the opinions of them all. I shall therefore follow another method, and omitting all superfluous labor, I shall simply inquire the angel’s meaning. I must, however, refer briefly to opinions received by the consent of the majority, because they occupy the minds of many, and thus close the door to the correct interpretation. The Jews, for instance, are not agreed among themselves, and their difference of opinion only serves to produce and perpetuate darkness, rather than to diffuse the clearness of light. Some explain it of Antiochus, and others of the Romans, but in a manner different to that which I shall afterwards state. The Christian expositors present much variety, but the greater number incline towards Antichrist as fulfilling the prophecy. Others, again, use greater moderation by supposing Antichrist to be here obliquely hinted at, while they do not exclude Antiochus as the type and image of Antichrist. This last opinion has great probability, but. I do not approve of it, and can easily refute it. Antiochus did not long survive the pollution of the Temple, and then the following events by no means suit the occurrences of this time. Nor can his sons be fairly substituted in his place, and hence we must pass on to some other king, distinct from Antiochus and his heirs. As I have already stated, some of the Rabbis explain this of the Romans, but without judgment, for they first apply the passage to Vespasian, and Titus his son, and then extend it to the present times, which is utterly without reason, as they chatter foolishly, according to their usual custom. Those who explain it of Antichrist, have some color of reason for their view, but there is no soundness in their conclusion, and we shall perceive this better in the progress of our exposition. We must now discover what king the angel here designates. First of all, I apply it entirely to the Roman Empire, but I do not (185) consider it to begin at the reign of the Caesars, for this would be unsuitable and out of date, as we shall see. By the word “king” I do not think a single person indicated, but an empire, whatever be its government, whether by a senate, or by consuls, or by proconsuls. This need not appear either harsh or absurd, as the Prophet had previously discussed the four monarchies, and when treating of the Romans he calls their power a kingdom, as if they had but a single ruler over them. And when he spoke of the Persian monarchy, he did not refer to a single ruler, but included them all, from Cyrus to the last Darius, who was conquered by Alexander. This method of speech is already very familiar to us, as the word “king” often means “kingdom.” The angel, then, when saying, a king shall do anything, does not allude to Antiochus, for all history refutes this. Again, he does not mean any single individual, for where shall we find one who exalted himself against all gods? who oppressed God’s Church, and fixed his palace between two seas, and seized upon the whole East? The Romans alone did this. I intend to shew more clearly to-morrow how beautifully and appositely everything related by the angel applies to the Roman empire; and if anything should appear either obscure or doubtful, a continued interpretation will bring it to light and confirm it. <\/p>\n We lay this down at once; the angel did not prophesy of Antiochus, or any single monarch, but of a new empire, meaning, the Roman. We have the reason at hand why the angel passes directly from Antiochus to the Romans. God desired to support the spirits of the pious, lest they should be overwhelmed by the number and weight of the massacres which awaited them and the whole Church even to the advent of Christ. It was not sufficient to predict the occurrences under the tyranny of Antiochus; for after his time, the Jewish religion was more and more injured, not only by foreign enemies, but by their own priesthood. Nothing remained unpolluted, since their avarice and ambition had arrived at such a pitch, that they trod under foot the whole glory of God, and the law itself. The faithful required to be fortified against such numerous temptations, until Christ came, and then God renewed the condition of his Church. The time, therefore, which intervened between the Maccabees and the manifestation of Christ ought not to be omitted. The reason is now clear enough why the angel passes at once from Antiochus to the Romans. <\/p>\n We must next ascertain how the Romans became connected with the elect people of God. Had their dominion been limited to Europe alone, the allusion to them would have been useless and out of place. But from the period of the kings of Syria being oppressed by many and constant devastation’s in war, both at home and abroad, they were unable to injure the Jews as they had previously done; then new troubles sprang up through the Romans. We know, indeed, when many of the kings of Syria were indulging in arrogance, how the Romans interposed their authority, and that, too, with bad faith, for the purpose of subjecting the east to themselves. Then when Attalus made the Roman people his heir, the whole of Asia Minor became absorbed by them. They became masters of Syria by the will of this foolish king, who defrauded his legal heirs, thinking by this conduct to acquire some regard for his memory after his death. From that period, when the Romans first acquired a taste of the wealth of these regions, they never failed to find some cause for warfare. At length Pompey subdued Syria, and Lucullus, who had previously carried on war with Mithridates, restored the kingdom to Tigranes. Pompey, as I have already remarked, subjected Syria to the Romans. He left, indeed, the Temple untouched, but we may conjecture the cruelty which he exercised towards the Jews by the ordinary practice of this people. The clemency of the Romans towards the nations which they subdued is notorious enough. After Crassus, the most rapacious of all men, had heard much of the wealth of the Jews, he desired that province as his own. We know, too, how Pompey and Caesar, while they were friends, partitioned the whole world among themselves. Gaul and Italy were assigned entirely to Caesar; Pompey obtained Spain, and part of Africa and Sicily; while Crassus obtained Syria and the regions of the east, where he miserably perished, and his head, filled with gold, was Carried about in mockery from place to place. A second calamity occurred during that incursion of Crassus, and from this time the Jews were harassed by many and continual wars. Before this period, they had entered into an alliance with the Romans, as we are informed by the books of the Maccabees, as well as by profane writers. Therefore, when they granted liberty to the Jews, (1Ma 8:0<\/span>, and 14) it; was said (186) they were generous at the expense of others. This was their ordinary and usual practice; at first they received with friendship all who sought their alliance by treaty, and then they treated them with the utmost cruelty. The wretched Jews were treated in this way. The angel then alludes to them first, and afterwards speaks of Antiochus. All these points, thus briefly mentioned, we must bear in mind, to enable us to understand the context, and to shew the impossibility of interpreting the prophecy otherwise than of the Romans. <\/p>\n I now proceed to the words, The king shall do according to his will I have stated that we need not restrict this expression to a single person, as the angel prophesies of the continued course of the Roman monarchy. He shall raise himself and magnify himself, says he, above every god. This will be explained by and bye, where the king is said to be a despiser of all deities. But with reference to the present passage, although impiety and contempt of God spread throughout the whole world, we know how peculiarly this may be said of the Romans, because their pride led them to pass an opinion upon the right of each deity to be worshipped. And, therefore, the angel will use an epithet for God, meaning fortitude’s and munitions, מעזים megnezim as in Dan 11:38<\/span>. That passage, I shall show you to-morrow, has been badly explained; for interpreters, as we shall discover, are utterly “at sea” as to its meaning. (187) But here the angel, by attributing contempt of the one God and of all deities to the Romans, implies their intense pride and haughtiness, in which they surpassed other profane nations. And, truly, they did not preserve even a superstitious fear of God; and while they vauntingly paraded the superior piety of both their ancestors and themselves, yet, an accurate perusal of their writings will disclose what they really thought. They made a laughingstock of all divinities, and ridiculed the very name and appearance of piety, and used it only for the purpose of retaining their subjects in obedience. The angel then says most truly of his empire, it shall magnify itself against all deities; and it shall speak wonderful things against the God of gods, by which the Jewish religion is intended. For before they had passed into Asia Minor, and penetrated beyond Mount Taurus, they were ignorant of the law of God, and had never heard of the name of Moses. They then began to take notice of the worship of some peculiar god by that nation, and of the form of their piety being distinct from that of all other people. From the period of the knowledge of the peculiarities of the Jewish religion being spread among the Romans, they began to vomit forth their blasphemies against the God of gods We need not gather together the proof of this from their histories; but Cicero in his oration for Flaccus, (section. 28,) tears most contemptuously to pieces the name of the true God; and that impure slanderer — for he deserves the name — so blurts out his calumnies, as if the God who had revealed himself to His elect people by his law, was unworthy of being reckoned with Venus or Bacchus, or their other idols. Lastly, he treats the numerous massacres to which the Jews were exposed, as a proof of their religion being hated by all the deities; and this he thinks ought to be a sufficient sign of the detestable character of their religion. The angel then has every reason to declare the Romans puffed up with pride and haughtiness, as they did not hesitate to treat the name of the true God with such marked contempt. <\/p>\n He shall utter, says he, remarkable things against the God of gods The angel seems to refer to a single individual, but we have stated his reference to be to this empire. He adds next, And he shall prosper until the consumption, or completion, or consummation of the indignation, since the determination has been made Here also the angel treats of a long succession and series of victories, which prevent the application of the passage to Antiochus. For he died immediately after he had spoiled the Temple; all his offspring perished by each other’s hands; and the Romans, to their great disgrace, acquired possession of Syria and that portion of the East. We must necessarily explain this of the Romans, as they notoriously prospered in their wars, especially on the continent of Asia. And if they were sometimes in difficulties, as we shall see to-morrow when treating the words which the angel will then use, they soon recovered their usual success. The angel here says, This king shall prosper till the end of the indignation; meaning, until God should punish the hypocrites, and thus humble his Church. I refer this to God, as I shall explain more at length tomorrow. <\/p>\n (185) The edit. of 1617 has nunc instead of non , which is the correct reading. — Ed. <\/p>\n (186) The Latin is “ ille dicebat , ” the French has “ un quidam disoit , ” — a curious mixture which implies uncertainty. Can it be Crassus? — Ed. <\/p>\n (187) See the Dissertations at the end of this volume. <\/p>\n HOMILETICS<\/em><\/p>\n SECT. XLI.THE WILFUL KING. (Chap. Dan. 11:36-39<\/span>.)<\/p>\n The present part of the prophecy regards a king, power, or sovereignty, emphatically spoken of as the king. Some will have Antiochus Epiphanes still intended by this king. The great majority of evangelical interpreters, however, believe that the angel has already passed from that monarch and the empire which he represented, to that which was to succeed it, namely, that of the Romans, who are certainly introduced in a preceding verse as the ships of Chittim, and who seem to be the subject of that part of the prophecy immediately preceding the present. [322] The question is whether the Fourth or Roman Empire in general is here described; or, as in the vision of the Four Beasts we saw that empire represented by, concentrated in, and identified with, a little horn or special power springing out of it,whether we are not also here to consider the same concentration and representative of that empire, or indeed the same little horn which is described in chap. 7. The similarity of the description in both places would seem to leave little room to doubt that the latter is the more correct view; and that in this Wilful King before us we see that power which, springing out of the decayed and dismembered ancient Roman empire, represented it for many centuries, having, like that empire, Rome as its metropolis and seat of government, its head being at the same time a spiritual ruler, the sovereign pontiff,in other words, the papacy. Bishop Newton, after showing that the prophecy could not with truth be applied to Antiochus Epiphanes, remarks that the prophet now proceeds to describe the principal author of the persecutions that should still follow the Church. The term king or kingdom, he observes, signifies any government, state, or potentate; and the meaning of Dan. 11:36<\/span> he conceives to be, that, after the empire was become Christian, there should spring up in the Church an Antichristian power that should act in the most absolute and arbitrary manner, exalt itself above all laws, divine and human, dispense with the most solemn and sacred obligations, and in many respects enjoin what God had forbidden, and forbid what God had commanded. The power, he further remarks, began in the Roman emperors, who summoned councils, and directed and influenced their determinations almost as they pleased. After the division of the empire, this power still increased, and was exerted principally by the Greek emperors in the East, and by the bishops of Rome in the West. He observes also that this power was to continue till the end of the indignation, or till God should have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people; and that it was an ancient tradition among the Jewish doctors that the destruction of Rome and the restoration of the Jews would fall out about the same period. Mr. Birks observes that some have referred the whole passage (Dan. 11:36-39<\/span>) to Antiochus, others to an infidel king yet to arise, others to democratic infidelity in the Roman empire, and others to the popedom or the Christian Greek emperors; and that most divines, whether Fathers, Protestants, or Roman Catholics, believe that the same power or person is designed as in the Little Horn and the Man of Sin. Mr. Birks himself, like Mede and Bishop Newton, applies the prophecy to the idolatrous apostasy of the Church in the latter days, the Wilful King being identical with the Little Horn of chap. 7. We notice<\/p>\n [322] The king<\/em> (Dan. 11:36<\/span>). Dr. Pusey observes that the characteristics of this infidel king are self-exaltation above every god; contempt for all religion; blasphemy against the true God; apostasy from the God of his fathers; disregard of the desire of women; honouring a god whom his fathers knew not; adding, that of all these only one in the least agrees with Antiochus, while the prophecy unmistakably corresponds with that which in the Revelation is still future (Rev. 13:11-12<\/span>). But many believe that it also at least as unmistakably corresponds with the papacy, which is also foretold in the Revelation. By the name king, says Dr. Cox, Mede, and others after him, understand the Roman state of power, under whatever kind or government; but it is more especially referred to Rome-papal, of which power the description is deemed peculiarly graphic. His despotism, blasphemy, and self-exaltation are clearly marked: and he was to prosper till the indignation be accomplished, or the time, times, &c., the 1260 years, when the wonders, as afterwards named, shall have an end. Mr. Birks argues against the idea of Antiochus, or a single infidel and blasphemous king yet to arise, being meant by this king, on the ground that the marks of time in the prophecy fix the close of the vision far beyond the days of Antiochus, and the promised period of the Jewish restoration; that there is no proof that the Wilful King denotes one individual person; that since the fall of Jerusalem the Jews have been exiles from Palestine, and the West, even more than the East, has been the scene of their sufferings; that the Wilful King is not an open atheist and rejector of all religion; that his place in the prophetic history is between the return of Antiochus from Egypt, b.c. 167, and the events predicted in chap. Dan. 12:1-3<\/span>, an interval of two thousand years, while the application of the preceding verses to the Romans as far as Constantine the Great would bring the prophecy to the time of the Vandal persecutions in Africa; and finally that the Wilful King is to prosper until the anger of God against Israel is accomplished. Calvin, who acknowledges the passage to be very obscure, applies it entirely to the Roman empire, not, however, considering it to be begun in the reign of the Csars; believing that the angel passed from Antiochus to the Romans, as God wished to support the godly under the troubles that awaited them till the time of the Romans, from whom, beginning with Pompey and Crassus, they continued to be harassed by many and continual wars. Mede, who with Calovius, Geier, and others, applies the prophecy to Antichrist, connects Dan. 11:36<\/span> with the precedingto the time appointed, the king shall do his will, &c. Dr. Clarke things the prophecy may apply to Antiochus; but observes that it is well known that an Antichristian power did<\/em> spring up in the Christian Church, showing itself in the Greek emperors in the East, and in the bishops of Rome in the West. Roman Catholic interpreters, as De Lyra, Hugo, and others, after Jerome and the fathers, understand by the king the Antichrist who is to appear at the end of the world, and to reign three years and a half. colampadius and Melanchthon regarded him as both the pope and the Turk. Others of the Reformers, as Osiander and Pfaff, understand the pope to be meant from here to the end of the prophecy. Willet thinks all was historically fulfilled in Antiochus, to whom the prophecy specially pointed, though it has a typical application to the Papal Antichrist. Brightman, like Calvin, applies the prophecy to the Romans, and especially to the Roman emperors, the object of the prophecy being to show what would be the state of the Jews to all ages, till gathered into one fold with the Gentiles. Keil observes, that after the example of Porphyry, Ephrem Syrus, and Grotius, almost all modern interpreters, that is, in Germany, find here only a description of the conduct of Antiochus Epiphanes up to the time of his destruction; while of believing interpreters, some, as C. B. Michaelis, Hvernick, and others, regard the whole as having a typical reference to Antichrist; while others, as Jerome, Theodoret, Luther, colampadius, Osiander, Calovius, Geier, and at length Kliefoth, interpret the section as a direct prophecy of Antichrist, the king being the little horn growing up among the ten kingdoms of the Fourth Empire, and described in chap. Dan. 9:26<\/span> as the prince that shall come, and introduced here as a new subject He remarks that the Rabbinical interpreters have also adopted the idea of a change of subject in Dan. 11:36<\/span>; while his own opinion is that the reference of the section to Antiochus is essentially correct, and that the supposition of a change of subject is not established. He admits, however, that what is said regarding the king in Dan. 11:36-39<\/span>, goes far beyond what Antiochus did, does not harmonise with what is known of Antiochus, and is expressly referred in the New Testament to Antichrist; but thinks that these circumstances rather show that in the prophetic contemplation there is comprehended in the image of one<\/em> king what has been historically fulfilled in its beginning by Antiochus Epiphanes, but shall only meet its complete fulfilment by the Antichrist in the time of the end. By the king, Mr. Bosanquet also understands the king of fierce countenance mentioned in chap. Dan. 8:23<\/span>, to which the prophecy goes back, after coming to Alexanders kingdom in Dan. 11:4<\/span>, in order to relate what shall be in the latter days, the great object of the vision; this king being, in his view, the personification of Mohammedanism, who literally destroyed the mighty and the holy people, putting an end to the Jewish kingdom of the Homerites in Arabia Felix, b.c. 627, after it had existed for some seven hundred years, the last remnant of the Jews as a nation.<\/p>\n I. The power itself<\/strong>. The king (Dan. 11:36<\/span>). The term might either indicate a single individual ruler, as in the case of Alexander (Dan. 11:3<\/span>), or a series of rulersas in the expression four kings which shall arise (chap. Dan. 7:17<\/span>). From the lengthened period of his predicted continuance, the term would seem here to have the latter meaning, and, like the Little Horn in chap. 7, to indicate an arrogant and blasphemous power that should rise in or out of the Roman empire. This, with most expositors of prophecy, we can only regard as, in the first instance at least, the papacy. The expression the king seems emphatic; and it is scarcely likely that it should be used to designate Antiochus whom the angel had introduced as a vile person to whom they should not give the honour of the kingdom (Dan. 11:21<\/span>). The emphatic term might naturally be chosen to indicate a new power that should occupy a conspicuous place in the future history of Gods people. The type, which doubtless Antiochus was, appears now, as Archdeacon Harrison observes, to be lost sight of in the prophecy, and the antitype to be almost exclusively in view. According to the view of Christian antiquity, the prophecy is now occupied for some time at least with the description of that tyrannical and persecuting power already indicated in the Little Horn of the Fourth Beast, the description of which so closely corresponds with that of this Wilful King. The papacy or popedom may well be spoken of as the king, inasmuch as the popes not only claimed to be sovereigns, but sovereigns above all others however exalted, combining with a temporal sovereignty a spiritual jurisdiction which embraced all Christendom. It is justly viewed as the power to which the Apostle referred in 2Th. 2:3-4<\/span>, as that which should arise in the Church as the result of an apostasy, or mystery of iniquity, which had even in his time begun to work, and which was only then withheld from fully developing itself by an existing hindrance which he does not name, and which, on the removal of that hindrance, would reveal itself, and continue until destroyed by the Lords second appearing.<\/p>\n II. Its character<\/strong>. The king shall do according to his will (Dan. 11:36<\/span>). The leading characteristic of this power was to be absolute and arbitrary conduct. Of all absolute and arbitrary rulers he should be the chief. Antiochus acted as a type and shadow of this king when he commanded all the peoples under his sway to receive his laws and follow his religion. It is well known that the popes claimed, and for a time obtained, an absolute sway over the greatest earthly rulers in virtue of their assuming the place and authority of the Vicar of Christ, with power over both worlds, and possessing both the spiritual and the temporal sword, with a judgment that was infallible, and an authority that could set aside oaths and the most sacred obligations. The language of the Decretals and Bulls of the popes, to which the nations of Europe submitted for centuries, is, as Mr. Birks observes, that emperors ought to obey and not to rule over the pontiffs; that they owe an oath of fealty and subjection to the pope as their superior and head; that what the bishops of Rome decree ought to be observed by all; that it is permitted neither to speak nor to think differently from the pope; that he imparts authority to laws, but is not bound by them; and that he is made the head of the whole world. One example may suffice. Hume relates of Pope Paul IV., to whom Ferdinand, the brother of Charles V., applied for his coronation, that he thundered always in the ears of all ambassadors, that he stood in no need of the assistance of any prince; that he was above all the potentates of the earth; that he would not accustom monarchs to pretend to a familiarity or equality with him; that it belonged to him to alter and regulate kingdoms; that he was successor of those who had deposed kings and emperors; and that rather than submit to anything below his dignity, he would set fire to the four corners of the world. He went so far as, at table, in the presence of many persons, and even openly, in a public consistory, to say that he would not admit any kings for his companions; they were all his subjects, and he would hold them under his feet; so saying, he stamped on the ground with his old and infirm limbs: for he was now past fourscore years of age. Such was the king, the<\/em> king with emphasis; the king that by his absolute will and arbitrary power was to rule and afflict the Church and the world for many centuries.<\/p>\n III. Its doings<\/strong>. Described in various particulars in Dan. 11:36-39<\/span>.<\/p>\n 1. He shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god<\/em> (Dan. 11:36<\/span>). Here we have especially that which connects this prophecy with 2 Thessalonians 2<\/span>, and identifies this king with the man of sin there predicted. [323] For every god the Apostle has all that is called god; the expression, doubtless, referring to civil rulers, who are frequently so called in Scripture, and who are known frequently to have claimed divine honours. How far the Roman pontiffs have claimed this superiority is obvious from what has been already said. The popes have declared that their princedom is far more excellent than any human princedom; that the sacred power and authority of the pontiffs govern the rulers of this world; and that Christian emperors are bound to submit their mandates to theirs.<\/p>\n [323] Magnify himself above every god<\/em> (Dan. 11:36<\/span>). The allusion here, observes Mr. Birks, to 2 Thessalonians 2<\/span>., is so plain that it has been recognised by every class of interpreters, from Theodoret down to our own day. Polybius, quoted by Bishop Newton, says that Antiochus in his public sacrifices and worship of the gods was more sumptuous and magnificent than all who reigned before him, and that in his solemn shows and processions he had the images of all who were called or reputed gods, demons, or heroes carried before him. On the other hand, Calvin observes that the Romans in their pride and lawlessness surpassed other profane nations, and did not even preserve a superstitious fear of God, making a laughingstock of all divinities, and ridiculing the very name and appearance of piety, which they only used for the purpose of retaining their subjects in obedience.<\/p>\nFuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Antichrist indeed exists at all times, but only as a working spirit which has not yet come to its final development and concentrated embodiment. Wilfulness will be his characteristic; and magnifying himself, and irreligion. We everywhere and in all circles and teachings, hear about the Coming Man. He is the man of sin, the lawless one, the Antichrist. (Joseph A. Seiss, D.D<\/em>.)<\/p>\n
<\/strong><\/p>\nFuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n