I want to talk about the antichrist persona for a few minutes.

I pay a lot of attention to conversations about eschatology (end times events as they relate to scripture.) Everything going on around us is related to biblical end-times events; this includes Israel at war, the breakdown of our governmental systems, the collapse of global economies, and the coming of a man – the antichrist, that will shortly step up to take control over practically everyone and everything.

A large portion of scripture speaks in terms of “everyone” when clearly not everyone was there. One of the blatant examples comes from the narrative surrounding the three Hebrews who were brought into Babylon at the same time as Daniel, and they are the same ones who were thrown into the fiery furnace. 

Daniel was not included with them; why?

When you read the account dealing with Daniel and the three other Hebrews, you find that Daniel, after giving the King the dream and the interpretation, was promoted and made the ruler over the entire province of Babylon and chief administrator over all the wise men of Babylon. Daniel's Hebrew brethren were included among the wise men, and Daniel requested that the king appoint Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego (their Babylonian names) to manage the province of Babylon while Daniel was busy elsewhere. Logic tells you that Daniel had an entourage while he was doing business in various regions of Babylon, so obviously, there were a number of others not there to bow before this statue. Read the narrative in Daniel 2:46-49.

So, let's not assume that everyone, as scripture denotes, is always in compliance. Certainly, Samson was not, yet God deems him a fine example of an upright man. (You can read about Samson's adventures and sordid love life in Judges chapters 13 – 16.

If I want to get a firm grasp of this man, the antichrist/beast, I think it best to initiate this quest in Daniel chapter two. The saga sort of begins with Nebuchadnezzar during the second year of his reign.

“One night ... Nebuchadnezzar had such disturbing dreams that he couldn’t sleep.”
Daniel 2:1 NLT

So Nebuchadnezzar calls the people he depends on for answers to help him. But!!!

“He called in his magicians, enchanters, sorcerers, and astrologers, and he demanded that they tell him what he had dreamed. As they stood before the king, he said, “I have had a dream that deeply troubles me, and I must know what it means.”
Daniel 2:2-3 NLT

Nebuchadnezzar, speaking about Daniel and the three others who came from Israel, had this to say.

“Whenever the king consulted them in any matter requiring wisdom and balanced judgment, he found them ten times more capable than any of the magicians and enchanters in his entire kingdom.”
Daniel 1:20 NLT

Why then would you choose anyone else to tell you what your dream was, and yet look who he chose.

• magicians,

• enchanters,

• sorcerers,

• and astrologers.

If you are one who does not put your faith and hope in God, then this probably seems like a good idea. My father, with his sense of humor, would always make a comment about the tellers of fortunes and futures, how that if he were to go in there, the first thing he would say is, you tell me why I am here. Well, when you think about it, it makes sense.

After making a plea before the King, Daniel is given a chance. He gives all the credit to God, and this is what Daniel said.

“While Your Majesty was sleeping, you dreamed about coming events. He who reveals secrets has shown you what is going to happen.”
Daniel 2:29 NLT

The details.

“In your vision, Your Majesty, you saw standing before you a huge, shining statue of a man. It was a frightening sight.”
Daniel 2:31 NLT

What made this thing so frightening?

“This image's head was of fine gold, its chest, and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze, its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay.”
Daniel 2:32-33 NKJV

• The head was of fine gold,

  “You, O king, are a king of kings. For the God of heaven has given you a kingdom, power, strength, and glory; and wherever the children of men dwell, or the beasts of the field and the birds of the heaven, He has given them into your hand, and has made you ruler over them all—you are this head of gold.”
  Daniel 2:37-38 NKJV

  Consider this as you make judgments about those who are giving Israel grief right now. Clearly, God uses whom He chooses to be His firebrand. Some He deems to be gold. So this head was the Babylonian empire.

• Its chest and arms were made of silver,

  Silver is a pliable metal, just as gold is; however, it is notably less valuable than gold and will tarnish. Daniel 2:38a merely says,” But after you shall arise another kingdom inferior to yours...” Historically we know this to be the Medes and the Persians. All of these are known to be the basis of the Assyrians.

  “The empire of the Medes and Persians, whose union was denoted by the breast and two arms of silver; and which was established on the ruins of that of the Chaldeans on the capture of Babylon by Cyrus, B.C. 538” (The Ultimate Cross-Reference Treasury)

• its belly and thighs were made of bronze,

  “...then another, a third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth.”
  Daniel 2:39b NKJV

  Here is another of those over-the-top statements, and it is such because Alexander only controlled the majority of the then-known world, and the Roman Empire never held reign over the territories that Alexander did.

  This belly and thighs of bronze is “the empire of the Macedonians, or "brazen-coated Greeks," aptly denoted by the belly and thighs of brass, founded by Alexander the Great, who terminated the Persian monarchy by the overthrow of Darius Codomanus at Arbela, B.C. 331.” (The Ultimate Cross-Reference Treasury)

  Let's pause here for a moment. Bronze as a material for making weapons has advantages and disadvantages, strength, depending on the material integrated by the refiner's fire, and it often has an attractive quality like gold.

  The oddity is that it is difficult to separate the thighs from the legs, and nobody does that. So, from the belly to the toes, the fourth kingdom is an ever-weakening and fragile kingdom until the end when Jesus comes back and crushes it completely.

• Its legs were made of iron,

  Therefore, the legs are vital. In this case, they are of practical material, iron, but iron, like a cast iron pan, can shatter if dropped on a hard surface from mere feet away; I know this because I broke a covered pot in just such a manner. So the strength is only temporal.

  The point I am making is that the kingdom(s) represented, from the belly of this giant statue down to the toes, is, in essence, an integration of one kingdom along with all the others.

• And the feet – including the toes, were made of a mixture of iron and of clay.

  The toes are ten, and they, too, are a mixture of iron and clay. The implications are that this kingdom, by the time it has reached this era, has gone through multiple leadership transitions, but from the thighs down, there is a common – deadly, yet fragile thread.

  Clay can be used to make a nice model but has no strength at all.

  A brief history. The bronze is Alexander. Dead, his empire is split into four and then two. The two start well – the bronze but finish poorly integrating with the Assyrians, descendants of the Babylonians, and Japheth, the father of Gomer, Magog, to say the least.

"You watched while a stone was cut out without hands, which struck the image on its feet of iron and clay and broke them in pieces. Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold were crushed together and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; the wind carried them away so that no trace of them was found. And the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth." 
Daniel 2:34-35 NKJV

That stone is Jesus – He is God, and He is an aspect of the Father's wrath that is being poured out upon the earth when this destruction happens. Jesus will shatter all the final ruling empires and kingdoms upon the earth when He returns. Nebuchadnezzar didn't need to know all that as it would not affect him.

Daniel's vision of the ram and goat. Daniel chapter 8.

I am doing a quick study on Daniel chapter 8. If you know my writing, then you know that quick is a relative term for me, as this is eight pages long.

I took this study on because a teacher, whom I thought to be very knowledgeable in end times prophecy, seems to have changed his stance. To be straight, Joel Richardson wrote a book called The Islamic Antichrist, and it caused the prophetic books of the Bible to come alive for me. Suddenly, everything made sense. Having studied my Bible in light of this brother's books, I was able to respond when a pastor of mine told me, “No one can understand the Revelation!” I responded firmly with, I can, and I am no longer challenged by any of the prophetic books like Daniel or Ezekiel. So, Joel Richardson must have been experiencing tremendous pressure, for he asked his readers if there was anything they had read that gave them hostile or negative reactions toward Muslims. 

Inside myself, I heard this resounding answer, YES!, and I garnered that feeling from you, brother. 

Now, the reality of his question is that he perceived a growing level of animosity and was hoping that he had not fed into that. Think about this response to information and the reaction to such, when you learn that the most logical person to fulfill the roles of Antichrist and false prophet are Muslims, or, at least, strict followers of the Quran. 

Simply put, if you are a follower of the Quran, then you are a Muslim, and if you are a Muslim, then you know that the Quran demands that you follow the guidelines outlined in the Quran. 

For us naive Christians, who know little to nothing about the Quran, there are older passages that speak of respect and peace, but others have changed the rules, added newer passages, and made it clear that newer passages superseded the older ones, and that the newer ones call for an unquestioning elimination of those who do not bow to Mohamed, particularly, those of the book – the Bible.

So it comes across as though this author has now disavowed any knowledge of his first work, and, to make matters worse, I recently began to listen to him, as he spoke about his changing understanding of Daniel chapter 8 and how it did not speak to the future. 

To be honest, I cut him off before I became too disillusioned, and because of that, I cannot outrightly say that he is leading people into false teaching. I will say that what I heard prompted me to look, once again, at what Daniel tells us in chapter 8, and here it is.

Daniel's vision of the Ram and the Goat

Daniel 8:1-2 NET. "In the third year of King Belshazzar's reign, a vision appeared to me, Daniel, after the one that had appeared to me previously. In this vision, I saw myself in Susa, the citadel, which is located in the province of Elam. In the vision, I saw myself at the Ulai Canal."

Daniel tells us that he has had a vision (again) after the previous vision. Do a quick check, and you will find that Daniel has had two previous visions. In Daniel 2:9, God has revealed to him the dream of Nebuchadnezzar. This dream is immensely significant, as it tells us who the first three kingdoms are.

Daniel 7:2 shows Daniel interpreting the dream of King Belshazzar. The passage reads like this:

Daniel 7:2-3 NET. "Daniel explained: "I was watching in my vision during the night as the four winds of the sky were stirring up the great sea. (3) Then four large beasts came up from the sea; they were different from one another."

These beasts are empires, with their associated rulers. 

Daniel 7:4 gives us a description that sounds much like the years that Nebuchadnezzar spent without any sense, and when his sense returned.

If you compare the fourth beast to Nebuchadnezzar's statue dream, there are some remarkable similarities.

Daniel 7:7 NET. "After these things, as I was watching in the night visions, a fourth beast appeared -- one dreadful, terrible, and very strong. It had two large rows of iron teeth. It devoured and crushed, and anything that was left it trampled with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that came before it, and it had ten horns."

Daniel 2:33 NET. Its legs were of iron; its feet were partly of iron and partly of clay.

Most pairs of feet have ten toes.

Daniel 8:3 NET. I looked up and saw a ram with two horns standing at the canal. Its two horns were both long, but one was longer than the other. The longer one was coming up after the shorter one.

The ram with two horns is soon explained in Daniel 8:20

Daniel 8:20 NET. The ram that you saw with the two horns stands for the kings of Media and Persia.

Pay attention to this aspect of verse three, as this begins to play a role in the identification of the fourth beast.

" Its two horns were both long, but one was longer than the other. The longer one was coming up after the shorter one."

Dr. J. Vernon McGee has this to say about these horns

“The higher came up last." In other words, the horn representing Media came up first when Gobryas, the Median general, destroyed Babylon. Then later, the Persian monarchs gained the ascendancy over the Medes and took the great empire to its highest peak. This ram, then, with its two horns and one horn more prominent than the other, is the Medo-Persian Empire with the Persians being in the ascendancy.”

From Dr. John Gill

“a ram, which had two horns; a symbol of the kingdom of the Medes and Persians, signified by the two horns, Dan_8:20, an emblem of power and dominion, and sometimes used to signify kings and kingdoms; see Dan_7:24 and these as united in one monarchy, under one monarch, Cyrus, and continued in his successors unto the times of Alexander; and therefore called "a ram", or "one ram" (m), as in the original; and which in sound has some likeness to Elam or Persia: and this kingdom or monarchy may be signified by it, partly because of its strength and power, and partly because of its riches, as some think, as well as because it is a fighting creature, and it may be chiefly because this monarchy was mild and kind, and gentle to the Jewish nation: and it is very remarkable, that, according to Ammianus Marcellinus (n), the ram was the royal ensign of the Persians; whose kings used to wear for a diadem something made of gold, in the shape of a ram's head, set with little stones:”

Dr. Gill, in the paragraph above, states that Daniel 7:24 demonstrates these kings as a unified monarchy/kingdom.

Illustration 1: The Persian Empire, about 500 B.C. From the Historical Atlas by William R. Shepherd, 1923/1926

Daniel 8:4 CJB  "I saw the ram pushing to the west, north, and south; and no animals could stand up against it; nor was there anyone that could rescue from its power. So it did as it pleased and became very strong."

As we can see from the map above, the Persian empire was very extensive.

Daniel 8:5 CJB  "I was beginning to understand, when a male goat came from the west, passing over the whole earth without touching the ground. The goat had a prominent horn between its eyes."

Many understand this male goat to be Alexander the Great, of the Grecian Empire – they seemed to be unstoppable. The singular horn then indicates one ruling body, Alexander.

Daniel 8:6 CJB  "It approached the ram with the two horns, which I had seen standing in front of the river, and charged it with savage force."

“It” would be Alexander's troops attacking the Medo-Persian empire.

Daniel 8:7 CJB  "I watched as it advanced on the ram, filled with rage against it, and struck the ram, breaking its two horns. The ram was powerless to stand against it. It threw the ram to the ground and trampled it down, and there was no one that could rescue it from the goat's power."

The fact that it was powerless to stand, and that there was no one who could rescue it, does NOT mean that all persons were obliterated.

Daniel 8:8 CJB  "The male goat then became extremely strong; but when it was strong, the big horn was broken, and in its place arose what appeared to be four horns in the directions of the four winds of heaven."

The bighorn was Alexander, but the four horns that arose in its place were Alexander's four generals, and they took the Grecian kingdom as far as they could.

Daniel 8:9 NASB "Out of one of them came forth a rather small horn which grew exceedingly great toward the south, toward the east, and toward the Beautiful Land."

Out of the four, came two: the Seleucid kingdom to the North, and the Ptolemaic kingdom to the South. Out of the Seleucid kingdom came Antiochus IV Epiphanes. He is the one who is responsible for the desecration of the temple. The Beautiful land is Israel.

Daniel 8:10-11 NASB "It grew up to the host of heaven and caused some of the host and some of the stars to fall to the earth, and it trampled them down. (11) It even magnified itself to be equal with the Commander of the host, and it removed the regular sacrifice from Him, and the place of His sanctuary was thrown down."

To be honest, verses 10 and 11 are difficult, that is, until we consider the role of Antiochus in Israel's history. The problem here is that most of this information is not available to us in approved scripture.

This might seem like an odd conversation to many of you, but it took on a whole new meaning one day when I tried to have a conversation with a family at church that I had never spoken with before. The husband seemed taken aback that I would even try to discuss something biblical. He told me that we should only discuss things that are in the Bible. I responded back with, it's funny you should say that, for during the time of Herod, an entrepreneurial Jew, noticed that the law in Deuteronomy listed very specific items that would become ceremonially unclean; however, it never listed granite, and so they devised a method of lathing cups, bowls, and jugs from granite. The advantage here is that the granite dinnerware would never be deemed unclean and, therefore, unusable. This was such a novel idea that it became a standard and exists to this day. 

Does scripture tell us that, and therefore make it valid? 

Not exactly, but then there is that amazing moment in time, when Jesus, the tektōn son, ordered the servants at the Jewish wedding to fill up the stone vessels with water. We do not know if the servants were Gentiles or not, but if they had been, and the vessels had not been made of granite, those vessels would have been instantly made unclean by their touch and unusable. Did Jesus know the vessels were granite? Apparently, he did, and that is where this point of saying, he was a tektōn son, comes into play; for you see, a tektōn is the Greek word for a craftsman, and a craftsman could even apply to a poet. The scripture does not say that Joseph was a carpenter; it says he was a craftsman. He may well have been a craftsman with granite. Considering that a granite quarry was found just a half-mile outside of Nazareth, it could easily have been a place where Jesus learned a trade, lathing the very granite vessels that were at this party. Now, should I ignore outside information, especially when it paints a more accurate picture of the scene? No.

Verses 10-12 of Daniel chapter 8 are very clearly defined when they are read in 1Macabees 1:44-64, and in 2Macabees 4:13-17.

Suddenly, Daniel 8 takes a turn toward the future, which is about the time in which we live.

Daniel 8:13-14 NASB "Then I heard a holy one speaking, and another holy one said to that particular one who was speaking, "How long will the vision about the regular sacrifice apply, while the transgression causes horror, so as to allow both the holy place and the host to be trampled?" (14) He said to me, "For 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the holy place will be properly restored."

In Matthew's gospel, it is recorded that the disciples, upon leaving the temple with Jesus, turned and pointed out the outstanding architecture and construction materials that made up the temple to Jesus. Jesus had his mind on other things and replied with this.

Matthew 24:1-2 NASB "Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when His disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him. (2) And He said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down."

Interesting how Daniel 9 tells us that from the order to rebuild Jerusalem until the time of the Messiah, it would be 490 years. That is equal to 70 weeks of years. 483 of those years have transpired. There is nothing to prevent that seventieth week of years from taking place and bringing this all to an end, and yet we are still here. Are you ready?

It is almost as if there is nothing left to do but flip the switch, and I assure you, it will feel like it. And then, the church will be caught away.

Daniel 8:15-18 NLT  "As I, Daniel, was trying to understand the meaning of this vision, someone who looked like a man stood in front of me.  (16)  And I heard a human voice calling out from the Ulai River, “Gabriel, tell this man the meaning of his vision.”  (17)  As Gabriel approached the place where I was standing, I became so terrified that I fell with my face to the ground. “Son of man,” he said, “you must understand that the events you have seen in your vision relate to the time of the end.”  (18)  While he was speaking, I fainted and lay there with my face to the ground. But Gabriel roused me with a touch and helped me to my feet."

Gabriel tells Daniel, understand, for the vision is for the time of the end.
The time of the end is a relative term. To the Jews who are looking for the Messiah (still), this can only happen when He comes riding back onto the scene on His white horse, as the angry judge of the earth. To the church, the time of the end applies to the catching away of the church, and others still see this as the outpouring of God's wrath upon the earth.

In all of the above cases, none apply to Daniel.

Daniel 8:19 NASB "He said, 'Behold, I am going to let you know what will occur at the final period of the indignation, for it pertains to the appointed time of the end."

Much like the disciples, who asked Jesus two specific questions, Daniel is going to get an answer about a very detailed time frame. Another translation tells us,

Daniel 8:19 NLT  "Then he said, “I am here to tell you what will happen later in the time of wrath. What you have seen pertains to the very end of time."

Perhaps you didn't catch the difference. One calls the last seven-year period the indignation, while the NLT appropriately calls it “the time of wrath.” There really is no difference, but it is easy to assign some bluster to the word indignation and still have no action added to it. I see this nonsense all the time with my grandchildren. Wrath, on the other hand, includes a good whipping. Webster's dictionary defines indignation as 1. Anger or extreme anger mingled with contempt, disgust, or abhorrence. Most certainly, these last seven years on earth will be all of the above.

Gabriel tells Daniel, “what you have seen pertains to the very end of time.” The NASB states, “it pertains to the appointed time of the end.” We have spoken of this before, but many get very confused and cannot make a distinction between the end of the seven-years and the coming of Christ for His church.
Revelation 14:7 speaks of that very time when God will come and sit as judge over the earth. Revelation 19 gives a detailed description of what He will look like when He comes.
But if you are looking for a heavily detailed description of Jesus in His return for His church, you won't find much. Here is what we do have.

1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 NASB (14) "For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. (15) For this, we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. (16) For the Lord, Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. (17) Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord."

Titus 2:11-14 NASB "For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, (12) instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age, (13) looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, (14) who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds."

Revelation, chapters 1-3, speaks of the church age, that time in which we live. This is an era that began when Jesus Christ rose from the dead, ascended into the heavens, and sent the Holy Spirit to lead, guide, teach, and comfort us. Chapter three of Revelation ends by talking about the Laodicean church, the last of the seven personifications of the church. 

With that, Revelation chapter 4 opens with these words, “after these things,” and thus begins the seven-years of wrath, and the wrath of God being poured out upon the earth.

Thus begins an explanation, by Gabriel, of Daniel's vision.

Daniel 8:20 NASB "The ram which you saw with the two horns represents the kings of Media and Persia."

When Daniel interpreted the statue for Nebuchadnezzar, he said, you, oh king, are that head. With that information, we know, with precision, how the four kingdoms begin. 

In Daniel chapter five, we see Belshazzar now ruling as king. The chain of events takes us from Nebuchadnezzar to Armel-Marduk, and then to Nabonidus (Belshazzar), but these are all considered the Babylonian kingdom. 

The kingdom changed hands when Darius the Mede received the kingdom at about the age of sixty-two. (Daniel 5:31). Daniel enjoyed success in Babylonian captivity through the reign of Cyrus, the king of Persia.

A bit of information concerning Darius the Mede. 

There is no known historical character named Darius before Darius the Great, who is too late to fit in here. 

Since Cyrus became ruler when Babylon fell, some have identified Darius the Mede and Cyrus as one and the same (see Dan_6:28). The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament. Copyright © 2000 by John H. Walton, Victor H. Matthews, and Mark W. Chavalas.

Daniel 8:21 NASB "The shaggy goat represents the kingdom of Greece, and the large horn that is between his eyes is the first king."

We just covered that information. So we transition from the Babylonian to the Medo-Persian, to the Grecian Empire, and Alexander.

Daniel 8:22 NLT  The four prominent horns that replaced the one large horn show that the Greek Empire will break into four kingdoms, but none as great as the first.

Note how the verse tells us what the chain of events will be.

• The Grecian empire was ruled by one man, Alexander. In a relatively short time, he dies, and the kingdom splits into four, ruled by four of Alexander's generals.
• Now the Grecian kingdom is in four parts. (1) Seleucus, who had Syria and Babylon; (2) Lysimachus, who had Asia Minor; (3) Ptolemy, who had Egypt; and (4) Cassander, who had Greece.

We know from the beginning of our look into Daniel eight that the four horns end up being two.

Daniel 8:3 NLT  "As I looked up, I saw a ram with two long horns standing beside the river. One of the horns was longer than the other, even though it had grown later than the other one."

These two horns were the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires.

Daniel 8:23-25 NLT  “At the end of their rule, when their sin is at its height, a fierce king, a master of intrigue, will rise to power.  (24)  He will become very strong, but not by his own power. He will cause a shocking amount of destruction and succeed in everything he does. He will destroy powerful leaders and devastate the holy people.  (25)  He will be a master of deception and will become arrogant; he will destroy many without warning. He will even take on the Prince of princes in battle, but he will be broken, though not by human power."

A quick stab at verses 23, 24 for a moment.
The Contemporary English Version tells us this: “when these rulers have become as evil as possible, their power will end, and then a king who is dangerous and cannot be trusted will appear.”
This guy has a variety of descriptives attributed to him: a king of fierce countenance, full of pride, and an arrogant king. These titles could fit a variety of people or ideologies.

Dan_8:25. stern-faced king. The description in verse Dan_8:23-25 pertains to Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who reigned from 175 to 164 B.C. His wisdom was corrupted for use in hypocrisy, intrigue, double-crossing, and treachery. For a summary of his actions, see comments on Dan_11:21-39.
[The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament. Copyright © 2000 by John H. Walton, Victor H. Matthews, and Mark W. Chavalas]

Dan_11:21. Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175-164). Antiochus IV, the brother of Seleucus, had been in Rome as a political hostage and was just returning (he got as far as Athens) when the assassination of his brother took place. His goals included converting Jerusalem into a center for Greek culture and helping the Jews to make the transition to becoming Greek citizens with Greek ways. The intrigues that he became involved in were many, but certainly, the main one concerning Jerusalem was how he handled the high priesthood (see next entry). The text calls him contemptible, and indeed he was. His title “Epiphanes” means “god manifest”—but the people preferred “Epimanes”—“madman.” While he was certainly a member of the royal line, the throne should have gone to Seleucus's son, Demetrius (who instead was taking Antiochus's place as a hostage in Rome). Another intrigue concerned the throne. He set up a co-regency with his nephew (a minor), who, a few years later, was murdered.
[The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament. Copyright © 2000 by John H. Walton, Victor H. Matthews, and Mark W. Chavalas]

While Antiochus fulfills the prophecy in many ways, there is another that is to come.
"The holy people" refers to Israel. 

The slaughter of these people by Antiochus Epiphanes seems almost unbelievable. He was as bad as Hitler. However, he is merely an adumbration of the Antichrist who is coming, of whom it is said: "And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations" (Rev_13:7).” Dr. J. Vernon McGee.

Note: An adumbration is a shadow, a faint resemblance, or an imperfect representation of a thing.

Since Dr. McGee referenced Revelation 13:7, let's go there for a minute.

“and there was given to it to make war with the saints, and to overcome them, and there was given to it authority over every tribe, and tongue, and nation.” (YLT)

If we were looking at Antiochus as the complete fulfillment:

• How does he move forward in time to fulfill Revelation 13:7?   He doesn't.
• Did Antiochus have authority over every tribe, tongue, and nation?   The answer is NO.
• Could we say that Antiochus was able to make war with the saints and to overcome them? Again, the answer is NO.

Then it seems, for legitimacy's sake, I have to ask if God refers to His people as saints. 

Look for a reference to saints in the Old Testament, and you will only find it used twice in the Psalms and again in Daniel's writings. In Daniel, it is always used in the future tense. So let's consider what David said.

Psalms 16:3 NASB "As for the saints who are in the earth, They are the majestic ones in whom is all my delight."

The word saints are the Hebrew word qadosh, which means sacred, holy: - consecrated.

While there may have been a few, like Moses and Joshua, only names like Samuel or Elijah come to mind, and we are certainly not talking about David – he was a man of flaws. 

But what do I learn about the character of God when I read about these people? 

God looks at people with different eyes than we do. The Word of God, which I must consider in its entirety, does not portray Israel as saints. If it helps to understand, I give you the Complete Jewish Bible translation.

Psalms 16:2-4 "I said to Adonai, 'You are my Lord; I have nothing good outside of you."  (3)  The holy people in the land are the ones who are worthy of honor; all my pleasure is in them.  (4)  Those who run after another god multiply their sorrows; to such gods, I will not offer drink offerings of blood or take their names on my lips." (CJB)

Pay attention to these words: “The holy people in the land are the ones who are worthy of honor; all my pleasure is in them.” The potential is there, but the predominant theme throughout the Old Testament comes across like this:

Deuteronomy 1:35 'Not one of these men, this evil generation, shall see the good land which I swore to give your fathers,"

So, yes, Antiochus has an immediate impact, but certainly not a future one.

However, there is one more aspect, and we see it in Revelation 13:7 when it says,

“and there was given to it to make war with the saints.”

What is God trying to say when He calls this “beast” an “it”? 

Perhaps God is trying to tell us that there is an evil spiritual entity that is migrating through powerful world leaders.

Let's stay on Daniel 8:25 for a minute.

Daniel 8:25 CJB  "He will succeed through craftiness and deceit, become swelled with pride, and destroy many people just when they feel the most secure. He will even challenge the prince of princes; but, without human intervention, he will be broken."

This personification of evil, whom the Quranic verses indicate will be the “Jesus” they are looking for,

He:

• “will succeed through craftiness and deceit,”
• Will “become swelled with pride,”
• Will “...destroy many people just when they feel the most secure.”
• “He will even challenge the prince of princes.”
• “but, without human intervention, he will be broken.”Having watched enough war movies, I know that the bad guy always gets taken out. Yes, this typically means killed in a dramatic fashion, but that is not necessarily the case here; this is one of those times when the terminology is inappropriate, for this false prophet will not be slain, but dramatically disposed of, almost as if some crane-like device reaches down and picks up both the beast and the false prophet.

Daniel 8:26-27 NLT  “This vision about the 2,300 evenings and mornings is true. But none of these things will happen for a long time, so keep this vision a secret.” Then I, Daniel, was overcome and lay sick for several days. Afterward, I got up and performed my duties for the king, but I was greatly troubled by the vision and could not understand it."

Daniel claims he could not understand. Perhaps that is because he did not need to understand, but the logic in that premise is thin, at best. But it is clear to me that WE were meant to understand. Read Daniel 12:10 in the NLT for it says, "Only those who are wise will know what it means."
In Christ, we are wise.

Micah 5:3 When she who is in labor has borne a child.

When you are doing your Bible study, there are a vast number of options you can use, such as Bible translations. All of them have issues, and all of them are marginal translations or transliterations – as most of the time, there is no direct English translation for Hebrew, Assyrian, or Greek. 

There is another factor you need to take into consideration; there was an even more intense version of Hebrew that is lost to us, and there were two versions of the Greek language.

Add this to the list of things that impact your understanding. Rome, as the ruling force, demanded full assimilation, and so the Hebrew language was outlawed, and Greek was the only language permitted. Many Hebrew documents/scrolls were destroyed, and that act mandated the practice of oral history as the method of passing along history and the law of God. Imagine the difficulties involved in the recreation of this book we call the Bible. With all the possibilities for error, it still carries the power and authority God intended it to convey.

So, when I begin to look at a passage, aside from the information above, I consider the context; examine concordances, like the Strong's or Word Study Dictionary, to find out what other implications these simple words carry; I then compare what I see, understand, and think to accepted commentators. (By the way, most of which have a bent toward the Antichrist coming out of Rome - that was a common and logical theme since the Islamic Caliphate had been effectively disbanded and outlawed globally), and then I compare what I have written to the other commentators to see which one more closely conveys what the Holy Spirit has been speaking to my heart.

A friend of mine recently asked me what commentary I should get to obtain the most out of my Bible study. Oddly, this brother worked in the church for a time and should probably be assisting me. I did not have a good answer, as I have about 54 commentaries on my computer, and I rarely stick with just one. I recently learned that Matthew Henry's commentary was in agreement with something I consider to be a doctrine of the devil, and that certainly taints my opinion of his commentary. I frequent the commentaries of Albert Barnes, Adam Clarke, John Gill, and Joseph Benson. I use them because – I have no better way to say this- in comparing my thoughts to theirs, they are in alignment with me. I added the modern pastor John MacArthur to my sources because he is a smart man, but I find his information sadly lacking as he has a definite inclination against the Holy Spirit. And, I will add that there are many others, such as the IVP Bible Background Commentary, which has a wealth of information, but it, like some others, can be overwhelming.

A key to teaching that I have come to understand: If I don't know an answer, then saying so is the best thing I can do for you. To babble on does nothing more than create confusion. I fully expect those who deem themselves to be my students to research these things for themselves, as any good Bible student would do.

With that being said, let's get on with Micah, as we have made it to Micah 5:3.

Immediately I see a problem; I will explain.

I typically go to the NASB translation first; it reads like this.
Micah 5:3 NASB: "Therefore He will give them up until the time when she who is in labor has borne a child. Then the remainder of His brethren will return to the sons of Israel."

Whoever this “them” is has been given up until whoever this female entity gives birth to a child. If I am going to understand what is going on here, this verse is little to no help to me and requires detective work.

While the CEV spells out who this “them” persona is, the translators changed the dynamic, as the implication now is that Israel will be abandoned until the rest of the family returns to Israel. 

Look again at the NASB above, and you will see that the action of one event causes the other to happen, while the CEV requires both to occur. Which is it? I have many translations available and could merely do a count and take the majority, but the majority is not always right.

Micah 5:3 CEV: "The LORD will abandon Israel only until this ruler is born, and the rest of his family returns to Israel."

As I try to answer the question above, I find myself thinking about the Jews and wondering when they came rushing back to the homeland. That is the problem; there was no homeland, that is, until 1917 when the Balfour Declaration decreed that Palestine was the Jewish homeland. From Wikipedia: “The Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British government in 1917 during World War I announcing support for the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine, then an Ottoman region with a small minority Jewish population.” Giving the Jews some documented land to call their own indeed allowed them to call Jerusalem home once again. Sadly, as the effects of wars were coming on, even the United States refused to allow the Jews to immigrate here as they tried to escape the coming holocaust and the aftermath of those horrific years.

One other problem I have to overcome when I read the NASB is the desire to understand who the "them" is. For me, a logical path would be the Complete Jewish Bible, as it spells out who the “them” is, but here is where I encountered another problem, as the CJB puts verse 3 in front of 2. Now, I have to decide if this transposition of verses is a game changer, and if not, what is it telling me? Verse two from the CJB tells me: “Therefore he will give up [Isra'el] only until she who is in labor gives birth. Then the rest of his kinsmen will return to the people of Isra'el.” In a way, this is an easy out, as this version gives us the name Israel instead of merely saying them. 

So let's see if there is any other validation for Israel being the "them" in this passage.

• Finis Dake tells us it is Israel but merely says this is because of the rejection of the Judge of Israel at His first advent. That did not help my mind, so I am not sold.
• Let's look at the context. As I stated in my previous post on Micah 5:1, this verse does not appear to belong here; it apparently belongs in chapter 4; however, it does help to create a context.
  So what is happening to Israel, the southern nation?

Micah 5:1 CEV:  Jerusalem, enemy troops have surrounded you; they have struck Israel's ruler in the face with a stick.

This was most likely Nebuchadnezzar's troops that surrounded Israel, and the ruler being struck was Zedekiah. There is an ugly interaction between Zedekiah and a prophet named Micaiah. You can read about it here - 1 Kings 22:13-28. What I want you to see is two verses in particular. 1 Kings 22:24, but Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah went near, and smote Micaiah on the cheek, and said, Which way went the Spirit of the LORD from me to speak unto thee?  1 Kings 22:27 “ And say, Thus saith the king (Zedekiah,) Put this fellow in the prison, and feed him with the bread of affliction and with water of affliction until I come in peace.  Unfortunately, Zedekiah never returned.

Regarding judgment, Zedekiah's judgment came exactly as Micaiah had said; for they killed his sons before his eyes and then put his eyes out.

If Israel was abandoned until "this" unknown ruler is born, what did that look like for Israel?

Although Israel had been released from Babylonian captivity, that doesn't mean that they were free to govern themselves. By the time Jesus came along, Israel was under the control of yet another ruling force, the Romans. Quickly, if that is possible, let's name off some of those who controlled the region now called Israel.

• By 1420 BC, Israel is under the first Assyrian dynasty. This Assyrian rule continues until 612 BC. Note: The Assyrian rule was brutal, and one of the reasons that Jonah wanted nothing to do with them.
• Ruler-ship then transferred to the Neo-Babylonian reign under Nabopolassar, and then Nebuchadnezzar, who reigned from 605–526 BC. Both the Northern and Southern kingdoms were taken captive by Nebuchadnezzar.
• While under the rule of Belshazzar, a Babylonian, the Persian Empire overtook the Babylonians in 550 BC. The Persian Empire reigned until 358BC. In 539 BC, the Neo-Babylonian Empire fell entirely to the Persian Empire, now under the rule of Cyrus.
• While under the rule of Darius 111, 335- 330 BC, the Medo/Persian empire fell to Alexander the Great and the Grecian Empire. 359BC was already feeling the Grecian influence under the rule of Philip of Macedonia; however, Alexander the Great exerted his power in 336 and ruled until his death in 323BC. On a timeline, I can see that Alexander ruled over Palestine from 333-323 BC. Alexander made Israel a Greek province in 333BC. What this tells me is that while Israel may have still been in Babylon, Alexander was already in Palestine.
• With the death of Alexander, the kingdom was divided between his four generals. Eventually, the territory came to rest in the hands of two generals, Seleucus in the North, and Ptolemy in the South; this primarily put Ptolemy in charge of Egypt and the Northern African nations.
• This “Grecian” rule continued, in some form, until 64 BC. While Rome had been making steady inroads into the region with its Punic wars, it did not gain a solid foothold until 110BC. The Seleucid Empire, although ending in 64BC, had been under attack by Julius Caesar since 100BC.
• If we take this timeline up to the destruction of the temple in 70AD, we are talking about 1490 years of having foreign nations and entities ruling over Jerusalem. By 1917, Jerusalem was under British rulership, and it continued, even though inroads like the 1917 Balfour Declaration had been established, all the way to 1948 when Israel declared its independence from British rule, and itself a nation.

So what we saw in Micah 5:3 continued for well over 3,000 years of foreign powers ruling over God's land.

In 1948, the dispersed began to return and continue to this day in 2019.

Once again, the passage is:
Micah 5:3 KJV  “Therefore He will give them up until the time when she who is in labor has borne a child. Then the remainder of His brethren Will return to the sons of Israel.”

• “He” is Jehovah.
• “them” is the Jewish people.
• “she” is Israel.
• What was brought forth? 1. Jesus, but the more logical answer is: 2. Israel, the nation.
• “the remnant” - God has always had someone standing on the ground in Israel, and they were the remnant.
• “his brethren” is the Jewish people.

The (NET) translation of 5:3 -

"So the LORD will hand the people of Israel over to their enemies until the time when the woman in labor gives birth. Then the rest of the king's countrymen will return to be reunited with the people of Israel."

 The personage indicated by the phrase "He" was Jesus, and the time has come. Although Israel would not receive Him, the one who brought in the beginnings of the everlasting kingdom walked among the Jewish people, just as he will do once again.

Daniel chapter 11 - The Kings of the South and the North. Verses 1-4.

Let me apologize for the lack of posts, as I have been working on other things since delivering this bible study. Also, since getting advice from a friend who used to moderate a blog site, I have been conscious of the length. Initially, I intended to post all of chapter 11, but if you were to print it out, it would be twenty pages long. It took me three weeks to deliver. And, as you will see, it comes off as a rather intense history lesson. Consider the way God delivers information and how He speaks about the future. This is precisely why critics have found it easy to say, this was written after the fact. That is not the case, and I attempted to make it clear through timelines, explanations, and the interjection of historical aspects.  

Daniel chapter 11 - The Kings of the South and the North

A history of the Middle East from Darius to the future Antichrist. Daniel 11:1-34

Calvary Chapel Pastor David Guzik tells us, "This chapter contains one of the most specifically fulfilled prophecies of the Bible, predicting history over some 375 years and to the end of known time, with amazing accuracy.

Chuck Missler agrees with David Guzik when he says, "That the chapter is so specific, that many critics and scholars who deny supernatural revelation, have insisted that it is history, written after the fact, fraudulently claiming to be prophecy."

I realize we are working on chapter 11, but for the sake of understanding, How did Daniel 10 begin?

Daniel 10:1 In the third year of Cyrus, king of Persia (550 -530BC), a message was revealed to Daniel.

By comparison, how does Daniel 11 start out?

Daniel 11:1 And in the first year of Darius the Mede (522-486BC), I stood to strengthen him and to provide protection for him.)

• in the first year of Darius the Mede (522-486BC),
  This is a chronological gap of over 25 years. While the statement, “in the first year of Darius the Mede,” might seem unimportant, Daniel gives us several clues. One clue speaks specifically to when this event happened. Since Darius the Mede is the third aspect of Nebuchadnezzar's statue, we know that a fourth empire is still coming. However, that fourth empire, if we attempt a chronological accounting, is Grecian. And, even then, after Alexander's death, there were four Grecian Generals who ruled in Alexander's stead. God, it seems, will bypass the four and focus on the lineage of the one that has the most significant impact on Israel.
• 
  
Timeline from Nebuchadnezzar to Darius

• “I stood to strengthen him and to provide protection for him.”

An alternate translation says I stood to be “an encouragement ...” This actually sounds like the character of Daniel.

• "Him" is a reference to Darius.

Isn't that odd? You would assume that God would be like us and only take care of His own. But, who is to say that Darius does not belong to God as well.

In Isaiah, it says that God sent Israel to Babylon.

Isaiah 43:14 NASB Thus says the LORD your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel, "For your sake I have sent to Babylon, And will bring them all down as fugitives, Even the Chaldeans, into the ships in which they rejoice.

In Jeremiah, Israel is told that they will be given into the hand of the king of Babylon.

Jeremiah 20:4 NASB "For thus says the LORD, 'Behold, I am going to make you a terror to yourself and to all your friends; and while your eyes look on, they will fall by the sword of their enemies. So I will give over all Judah to the hand of the king of Babylon, and he will carry them away as exiles to Babylon and will slay them with the sword.

Who arose or stood to strengthen him?

In Daniel 10:19,20 we established that Gabriel was speaking, and may well be the speaker here. However, if this is Daniel speaking, in what ways could Daniel have sought or provided protection for Darius?

While we have certainly perceived Daniel to be a purveyor of wisdom, to several captor kings, being a protector has never been implied. One thing you need to keep in mind is that Daniel has, while in Babylon, been under subjection to a series of kings that were willing to end your life in a hurry, especially if you were a captive slave.

Four more kings over Persia before Alexander the Great.

Daniel 11:2: "And now I will tell you the truth. Behold, three more kings are going to arise in Persia. Then, a fourth will gain far more riches than all of them; as soon as he becomes strong through his riches, he will arouse the whole empire against the realm of Greece."

• "And now I will tell you the truth. Behold, three more kings are going to arise in Persia.”
  
  

  Daniel 2:31-45. Nebuchadnezzar is the head of gold, Cyrus the Mede, the shoulders of silver, and Darius, the Persian, the chest of bronze.

  
  
  Because the thighs and legs are made of iron and came after the Persian empire, it seems this is another.
  
  

  three kings. Note: These were, Cambyses, son of Cyrus; Smerdia the Magian impostor, and Darius Hystaspes. The Ultimate Cross-Reference Treasury

Matthew Henry's commentary tells us:

He (Gabriel) foretells the reign of four Persian kings (Dan_11:2): Now I will tell thee the truth, that is, the true meaning of the visions of the great image, and of the four beasts, and expound in plain terms what was before represented by dark types. (1.) There shall stand up three kings in Persia, besides Darius, in whose reign this prophecy is dated, Dan_9:1. Mr. Broughton makes these three to be Cyrus, Artaxasta or Artaxerxes, called by the Greeks Cambyses, and Ahasuerus that married Esther called Darius son of Hystaspes. To these three, the Persians gave these attributes - Cyrus was a father, Cambyses a master, and Darius a hoarder. So Herodotus. (2.) There shall be a fourth, far richer than they all, that is, Xerxes, of whose wealth the Greek authors take notice. By his strength (his vast army, consisting of 800,000 men at least) and his riches, with which he maintained and paid that vast army, he stirred up all against the realm of Greece. Xerxes's expedition against Greece is famous in history as the shameful defeat that he met. He who when he went out was the terror of Greece, in his return was the scorn of Greece.

With the understanding that we are using Darius as the baseline, Gabriel's comments logically pertain to those who come after Darius. However, we have already seen that God works outside our time frame, and He has little concern for chronology. We will see that this also pertains to a distant future; that future is now.

Timeline from Nebuchadnezzar to Darius

"There were several kings of Persia after Xerxes, such as Artaxerxes Longimanus, Darius Nothus, Artaxerxes Mnemon, Ochus, and Darius Codomanus, but these are not enumerated because the real ground of the invasion of Alexander, the thing which connected him with the affairs of Persia, did not occur in their reign, but it was the invasion of Greece by Xerxes." Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible

Daniel 11:2: “... he will stir up everyone against the kingdom of Greece.”

• • Xerxes did just that.
    The LASB has an intriguing comment: "The fourth Persian king may have been Xerxes I (also called Ahasuerus, 486-465 B.C.), who launched an all-out effort against Greece in 480 BC.
    This is the same king we see in the story of Esther.

Esther 1:1 - "The following events happened in the days of Ahasuerus. (I am referring to that Ahasuerus, who used to rule over a hundred and twenty-seven provinces extending all the way from India to Ethiopia." ) NET Bible

“A mighty King, Alexander the Great” Dan 8:21

Daniel 11:3 "And a mighty king will arise, and he will rule with great authority and do as he pleases.

Mighty is the Hebrew word gibbôr, which means powerful; by implication, warrior, tyrant. The disconcerting aspect of this word is that it was also used of the Nephaliim. This might imply that Alexander was also a giant.

Daniel 7:6 "After this I kept looking, and behold, another one, like a leopard, which had on its back four wings of a bird; the beast also had four heads, and dominion was given to it.

The beast having four heads is another clue that takes us back to Alexander's generals, who take over after his death.

Focusing on the word dominion.

H7985 - soltan: An Aramaic masculine noun meaning dominion, sovereignty. Most frequently, this noun is used in conjunction with God, showing that He has dominion over everything that exists (Dan_4:3 [3:33]; Dan_4:34 [31]). His dominion is greater than that of a person's many ways, one being that it is an everlasting dominion that can never be destroyed (Dan_7:14). This noun can also be used of kings (Dan_4:22 [19]). It was used in Daniel's dream of the four beasts to describe the dominion they have (Dan_7:6, Dan_7:12, Dan_7:26). Much less frequently, this word can be used in the concrete sense of a physical kingdom (Dan_6:26 [27]).

Daniel 8:5-8 "While I was observing, behold, a male goat was coming from the west over the surface of the whole earth without touching the ground; and the goat had a conspicuous horn between his eyes. 6) He came up to the ram that had the two horns, which I had seen standing in front of the canal, and rushed at him in his mighty wrath. 7) I saw him come beside the ram, and he was enraged at him; and he struck the ram and shattered his two horns, and the ram had no strength to withstand him. So he hurled him to the ground and trampled on him, and there was none to rescue the ram from his power. 8) Then the male goat magnified himself exceedingly. But as soon as he was mighty, the large horn was broken; and in its place there came up four conspicuous horns toward the four winds of heaven."

Note that none could rescue the ram from his power. The large horn represents Alexander's reign. Broken, it was replaced by his four generals.

Daniel 8:20-21 "The ram which you saw with the two horns represents the kings of Media and Persia. 21) "The shaggy goat represents the kingdom of Greece, and the large horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

I happen to believe the two horns represent the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires, the last of the Alexandrian empire.

The Division of Alexander's/Grecian empire into four kingdoms. Dan 8:22

Daniel 11:4 "But as soon as he has arisen, his kingdom will be broken up and parceled out toward the four points of the compass, though not to his own descendants, nor according to his authority which he wielded, for his sovereignty will be uprooted and given to others besides them."

Alexander only ruled for 13 years (336-323BC.)

From Wikipedia: “According to a Babylonian astronomical diary, Alexander died between the evening of June 10 and the evening of June 11, 323 BC, at the age of thirty-two. This happened in the palace of Nebuchadnezzar II in Babylon. Proposed causes of Alexander's death included alcoholic liver disease, fever, and strychnine poisoning. According to the University of Maryland School of Medicine report of 1998, Alexander probably died of typhoid fever (which, along with malaria, was common in ancient Babylon). In the week before Alexander's death, historical accounts mention chills, sweats, exhaustion and high fever, typical symptoms of infectious diseases, including typhoid fever. [”https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Alexander_the_Great]

Alexander's kingdom was parceled out to four generals, who were overtaken by Ptolemy to the south and Seleucus in the north.

• • “..though not to his own descendants.”

    From the IVPPBC: “Alexander died in 323BC, at the age of 33; a twenty-year struggle for succession ensued that eventually led to a four-way division of the empire. Two of those divisions were in the Aegean region (Cassander had Greece and Macedonia; Lysimachus had Thrace), while the other two divided up the Near East (Ptolemy had Egypt and Palestine; Seleucus had Syria, Mesopotamia and Persia). The Ptolemaic line is going to be represented by “the king of the South,” while the Seleucid line will be represented by “the king of the North.”