King of the North

reddogs

Contributor
Site Supporter
Dec 29, 2006
9,115
475
✟427,104.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Daniel 11:36-39 King James Version (KJV)

"36 And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.
37 Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.
38 But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.
39 Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain."

Now this interpretation of these verses makes sense. "This description of the Papal church parallels closely the descriptions of the “little horn” in Daniel chapter 7 and the “little horn” in Daniel chapter 8."
 
Upvote 0

reddogs

Contributor
Site Supporter
Dec 29, 2006
9,115
475
✟427,104.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
This is interesting, a complete explanation of the Adventist positions on Daniel 11...

"The three basic Adventist interpretations of the book of Daniel 11 are discussed below.

The Turkey and Egypt Position

The first view holds fairly closely to what Uriah Smith wrote in his 1884 book, Daniel and the Revelation and defends a strong literal interpretation throughout the entire chapter.

The King of the North in verses 40-45 is interpreted as being Turkey, either as the Ottoman Empire in its conflict in 1798 AD with Napoleonic France and the breakaway rulers of Egypt (verses 40-44), or as a last-days reincarnation of the Caliphate; and the King of the South in verses 40-45 represents Egypt.

Uriah Smith?s interpretation argues that all the verses up to and including verse 44 have already been fulfilled. The modern exponents of this position argue that verse 45 is to be interpreted as Turkey, leading a re-established Caliphate, which will establish a newly restored Caliphate in Jerusalem, after which this power meets its end, leading to the final time of trouble of Daniel 12:1.

This position has many adherents because (1) it appears to use a consistently literal hermeneutic (principle of interpretation) throughout the chapter, that is to say, the King of the North is always a literal, earthly power situated/based to the north of Jerusalem, and the King of the South is always a literal, earthly power situated/based to the south of Jerusalem; and (2) Ellen White appears to provide strong support for the views contained in Uriah Smith?s preaching on the ?Eastern Question? and the contents of his chapter on Daniel 11 in his book.

It should be noted that some recent Adventist commentators cast doubt on the extent of White?s support for this interpretation.

The Papacy and Atheism Position

The second position takes the latter half of the chapter symbolically, arguing that the papacy is represented in its persecuting phase during the 1,260 years of papal supremacy.

This position agrees with the first position of a literal/historical interpretive framework for verses 1-22, down to the death of Jesus Christ on Calvary, but argues that after Calvary, the New Testament (NT) consistently applies a more spiritualized interpretation of Old Testament (OT) literal actors.

For instance, historical Babylon in Daniel becomes spiritual Babylon in Revelation; ethnic Israel through the OT era to the end of the 490-year prophecy of Daniel becomes spiritual Israel in NT times; and so on.

Thus, although this position identifies historical actors from verse 23 onward, these historical actors are no longer considered to represent the literal earthly powers to the north and south of Jerusalem, but rather they represent spiritual powers that are manifest in earthly realities, such as, for instance, the papacy as the King of the North. Verses 36-39 represent the full flowering of the blasphemous and persecuting papal power before 1798 AD.

In verses 40-45, the papacy remains as the King of the North and atheism as the King of the South. This position parallels the identification of the atheist French Revolution in Revelation 11, and Revolutionary France being the power that overthrew the papacy in 1798 AD. This view came into vogue from the 1940s onward, after the writings of Louis Were, and is driven by two main factors: (1) literary parallels between the little-horn papal power of Daniel 7 and 8 and the King of the North from verse 36 onward; and (2) seeking to correlate the eschatology of Revelation 12-14 and 2 Thessalonians, with the actors mentioned in Daniel 11.

This view is probably the most commonly held view in the Adventist Church today.

The Papacy and Islam Position

The third (and most recent) position among Adventists reads Daniel 11 as the third, basically literal interpretation of the symbolic vision in 8:1-14, after the interpretations in 8:17-26 and 9:24-27.

Daniel 11:2-21 profile a sequence of historical events after the time of Daniel that affects his Jewish people and comprise background to the Messiah?s coming. Verse 22 predicts the death of Christ under imperial Rome at the heart of the chapter. Verses 23-30 trace the rise of the religio-political church of Rome and its political-military exploits, including the Crusades and later campaigns against Islamic power, in which Catholic forces coming to the land of Israel from the north and Muslim armies coming to it from the south sought to control it (verses 25-30).

Then verses 31-39 flesh out the predictions in Daniel 7 and 8 concerning the papacy?s unique and astonishing religious pretensions and vicious persecutions (verses 31-39; see also 2 Thessalonians 2). In verses 40-43, the papacy and its allies (?Babylon? in Revelation) finally triumph over Islamic power, its long-time religio-political nemesis (see also the fifth and sixthtrumpets in Revelation 9), during the ?time of the end? (after 1798 and 1844).

In the course of a final campaign, which apparently aims to persecute God?s true people, the papacy abruptly meets its end (verses 44-45) just before a ?time of trouble? and Christ?s second coming (12:1-3). This interpretation accepts religious emphasis and globalization developing after Christ?s first coming as Israel becomes the Christian church and Rome becomes the papacy. However, God?s true Christian people are also affected by the political-military activities of Rome and Islam at particular times and locations." ....What Does Daniel Chapter 11 Mean? | Adventist World
 
Upvote 0

reddogs

Contributor
Site Supporter
Dec 29, 2006
9,115
475
✟427,104.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Here is another good study on this I came across...
"What is true of God's relation with man in history also holds for His relation with man in prophecy. In the prophecies of Daniel God projects an active divine participation in human affairs from the time of His encounter with the prophet, through all the seeming disorder created by human attempts to gain power and force the subservience of others, until Michael at last stands up and brings such efforts to an unsuccessful conclusion. God's act of initially willing such a result did not "destroy human freedom; rather it set the context in which man's freedom would appear and mature, and what its ultimate 2 destiny would be." Thus, prophecy is an expression, not of coercion, but of the divine will to be involved with and close to mankind. It is the natural counterpart of God's involvement in human history, from which He is never absent. Therefore, if God is constantly with His people in history one would expect the fact to be reflected in prophecy, and in the nature of prophecy's fulfillment generally. To say merely that prophecy exists and is capable of accurate fulfillment is not enough. Different parts of Daniel's prophecy, in some facet of their bearing on the plan of salvation, have been in process of fulfillment— in their primary significance— in every era of history since Daniel.

The broader context of God's ongoing involvement with mankind in history and in prophecy suggests that it would be incongruous to apply Dan 11:2-35 to one very limited span of past time in myopically close detail, and then to apply the remaining verses to another very limited span of future time.1 It might be felt that the history of the mid-second century B.C. is so accurately described in Dan II that no other serious historical explanation is available— that history demands the former island of fulfillment and belief demands the latter. This is not the case, and it is a point to be made with emphasis. An alternative does exist, and it is one that corresponds to the breadth and level of significance one might expect from an inspired perspective on history. Details of minor importance are not allowed to 2 take on major importance in the prophet's thinking. A corollary is that items of major importance are given major emphasis. And here is a matter that demands the most careful attention. A condensed summary of history, inspired by the God who actively works in history to save mankind, would be expected to contain at least some reference to the Saviour, through whom that work is effected. Indeed, it could be expected that such an analysis of history would revolve directly around the Savior's activity and be saturated with implications concerning Him. This is in fact the case. In Dan 11:22, at the very center of a narrative spanning all of Dan 10-12, is a reference to Christ on the cross as the "prince of the covenant"— swept away, along with an overwhelming army of others, through a process of judicial murder, on falsified charges of disloyalty to Caesar.1 This reference to Christ in 11:22 is pivotal to the entire narrative which surrounds it, and to our discussion of that narrative. It takes more than human insight to recognize the significance of Christ's life, or His place in human history. When Peter stated, "'you are the Christ, the Son of the living God[,] Jesus replied, 'Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by 2 man, but by my Father in heaven.'" In the same way, Daniel's references to Christ match Him too closely to have been merely the product of human speculation.3 More than any scholarly argument the accuracy of these references confirms the inspiration of his prophecies....

Definition of Terms "North” and "South"
The most conspicuous and frequently recurring of the technical terms used in Dan 11 are "king of the North" and "king of the South."
In each section where the terms occur North and South are rival factions within a larger single entity. Thus in w . 5-15 North is Seleucid Syria and South is Ptolemaic Egypt, but both were Greek. In w . 23-28 North is represented by Octavian based in Rome and South by Mark Antony based in Egypt, but both men were Romans. In w . 29-45 the problem is more complex, but the same principle continues to apply. The exilic context Elsewhere in Scripture North and South do not represent rival factions of any identifiable larger entity. Such a relationship is unique to Dan 11. North in the exilic prophets is used to refer to oppressive powers in general — especially Babylon, but also Assyria. Occasionally the northern oppressor comes against Babylon rather than a from within it. Egypt, on the other hand, is consistently depicted as a country that holds out the false prospect of security as an alternative to seeking help from God.3 In all of this North and South are poised for conflict, and so the theme of superpowers engaged in an ongoing rivalry that must inevitably involve God's people is consistent with Daniel's usage. A second significance associated with Egypt is based on Exodus 5:2. Here Egypt in the person of Pharaoh refuses to recognize Yahweh's existence or authority: "Pharaoh said, 'Who is the Lord, that I should obey him and let Israel go? T do not know the Lord and I will not let Israel go.'" Pharaoh's open, intelligent denial of and opposition to the true God may be taken as an appropriate symbol for such opposition generally. Atheism would be one extreme form of such an attitude. Notice that if a long span of time is involved m the prophecy of Dan. 11, which is a fundamental claim of the historicist interpretation,6 it will be necessary for the terms "North" and "South" to apply during more than one era of history. Since no single world empire was dominant during the entire course of the prophecy, under this model, the terms must be taken to have different historical referents during different periods.^- And one must expect changes that go beyond the matter of one nation following another in time. As the prophecy of Dan 11 passes 2 3 into the Christian centuries God's people are no longer localized. Thus, while North and South remain agents of opposition, they begin to take less of their significance from the compass and more from the roles established for them in the exilic prophets and elsewhere in 4 Scripture, as cited above. The usage of the exilic prophets— which describe events that Daniel himself lived through— remains a consideration of the greatest importance in determining the extra-geographical significance of North and South in Dan 11."

Then he goes into his study on Daniel 11, with Ptolemaic Egypt facing Seleucid Syria in verses 5-15, Octavian (later Caesar Augustus) and Mark Antony in verses 23-28, and then symbolic of the direction from which oppressive powers come, Spiritual "Babylon/Egypt" in verses 29-45, which he considers merge against Gods people....
 
Upvote 0

reddogs

Contributor
Site Supporter
Dec 29, 2006
9,115
475
✟427,104.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Everyone seems to be able to agree on the start of Daniel 11, as even historians know what happened at the time of Alexander the Great...
"Daniel 11:2 – And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.”

The historical fulfillment of this verse is documented by the Persian Kings:

  1. Cambyses II (530-521 BC)
  2. Smerdis (521 BC)
  3. Darius I (521-485 BC)
  4. Xerxes (486-465 BC)
Xerxes excelled in wealth and power and also launched and invasion against Greece and lost that war. This aligns with the prophecies of Daniel 7 describing the Persian Empire as the Bear, and Daniel 8 associating it with the Ram.

Daniel 11:3“And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.”

This prophecy details the rise of Alexander the Great who reigned between 336 to 323 BC. This aligns with the prophecy of Daniel 7 with the rise of the Leopard beast and Daniel 8 with the rise of the He-Goat empire.

Daniel 11:4 – And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.”

Alexander’s kingdom was divided into four kingdoms after his death:

  1. The kingdom of Macedonia,
  2. The kingdom of Pergamus,
  3. The kingdom of Syria and Palestine – Selecus
  4. The kingdom of Egypt – Ptolemy I
This division and breakup into 4 separate kingdoms was also prophesied in Daniel 7:6 and Daniel 8:8."....

But then comes the hard part in which they seem to tend to put more of current events or political winds than historical timeline..
 
  • Love
Reactions: Terri Dactyl
Upvote 0