Sermon Tone Analysis

*First Baptist Church of Manchester*

*/Daniel 11:36-12:13 /*

*The Final Vision*

*“How Long Before the End?”*

*(Part 3 of 3)*

*David Saylor March 5, 2017*

*READ DAN.

11:36-45*

Child to parent: /“How long before the end?” (Dan.12:6)/

Last week we started /The Final Vision/ of Daniel that runs from Chapter 10 to the end of the book (chapter 12).

In the morning service we spent our time in Chapter 10, the introduction, and then in the evening we tackled the first 35 verses of Chapter 11.

They form a unit because they cover the period of history from Daniels time to the rise and evil career of Antiochus Ephipnines IV.

It is very interesting because the level of prophetic detail that God gave Daniel about the Seleucid and Ptolemaic kings and kingdoms is nothing short of impossible unless God is in it.

(sermon is online and Dr. Dee Keith’s dissertation gives greater details.)

The Time of the End

But we still have the final section of this chapter and the verses in Daniel chapter 12 that go with it.

*READ DAN.

12:1-4*

And something strange and wonderful seems to start happening around verse 36 with what seems a fairly generic reference: /“The king shall do as he pleases.”/

What king is this?

The discussion of the contemptible person (above v.21) seems to expand.

Antiochus Epiphanes is still in the foreground, but a more distant vision of someone /similar/ begins to enter into the prophecy - like when camera lens in a movie that has been focused on someone in the foreground begins to zoom out to someone in the background.

And for a brief moment, we see features of both images until the background picture is in focus.[1]

I’m perhaps getting ahead of myself.

Let’s acknowledge that the interpretation of these verses are difficult, as every scholar or commentator acknowledges, and there are many views.

Do they relate to past history, as above or to events did?

Or future?

And since there have been great minds arrayed on all sides, it is wise to proceed carefully and with humility.

A couple of things to note.

In my opinion, the fact that there are, starting here, so many divergent interpretations is one the best evidences for concluding that the events referred to are still future.

If the section were referring to past events, there is no reason it should not be as clear in talking about them as the earlier portions of the chapter are (last Sunday night – Dee Keith).

So should we then view them more symbolically like the “other” apocalyptic visions, where the details are not the focus?

In a book like this, there is never NOT another twist until it is finally completed.

(Yogi –“It ain’t over until it’s over.”)

We have previously “outlined” the book and said that first~/last seven chapters; historical narrative~/apocalyptic, etc.

But we must NOTE that this vision (chapter 11-12) is NOT written in the traditional “apocalyptic” style that we have been seeing in other visions.

No dragons, animal, monsters, etc.

It is written in a narrative form and we saw last Sunday night a “one to one” correlation to true historical events.

I strongly but humbly suggest that the remaining verses must be taken in the same way as what has gone before.

The earlier part of the chapter has spoken of kings and alliances and battles.

We have been able to give specific names and dates to these predictions.

The same thing should be true for this section, even though we have not yet witnessed the careers of those prophesied, and so cannot give them names.

But we have no warrant suddenly to substitute a symbolic understanding of the words for a literal one.

*There are three chief approaches to this section.*

The *FIRST* is that it IS continuing to speak of the career of Antiochus Epiphanes.

The best argument for this is that there is no obvious break between verses 35 and 36.

So when verse 36 begins, /“The king will do as he pleases,”/ it is natural to identify this king as the last-mentioned king - Antiochus.

The difficulty is that unlike before, what is said in this section does not fit Antiochus’s known career.

For example, v. 45 speaks of this (future) king pitching his palatial tents between the sea and the holy mountain (Jerusalem) where he meets his end.

This description of someone meeting his demise does not describe the place or nature of Antiochus’s death as other historians and the Bible signify (cf.

8:25).

Apparently he died of some stomach distress (worms, ulcers, or poison).[2]

If we look forward in the vision to the opening two verses of chapter 12, we learn that *Daniel 12:1* (NIV)1/ “At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise./

/ There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then.

But at that time your people—everyone whose name is found written in the book—will be delivered.

/

*/Daniel 12:2/*/ (NIV)2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.

/

There is going to be a judgment based on whose names are found in a book, and this will be followed by a resurrection.

/These prophecies definitely do not seem to be about Antiochus Epiphanes anymore/!

Calvin and many others noticed this.

It is more probable that Antiochus Epiphanes may be a /type/ of a greater evil character prophesied for the last days—I believe that is the case—and the details must be about the later character and not Antiochus himself whose career is highlighted.

The *SECOND view* is that /these verses prophesy part of the history of the early Roman Empire/.

This was Calvin’s view and we should not easily dismiss Calvin, certainly not me.

But Calvin was not entirely satisfied with his own interpretation.

For one thing, he refers to the “king” whose career is described in these verses, not to a specific individual, but to the “kingdom” or empire of the Romans as a whole.

But if this is right, it is out of step with the way kings are referred to in the first part of the chapter.

There “king” refers to a known individual.

It should be the same here, in my judgment.

Moreover, Calvin has difficulty fixing the details of each prophecy, another reason I have for saying that the prophesied events must be future.

The *THIRD view* is that /these verses refer to the Antichrist /who is said elsewhere to appear at the end of all things—just before the return of Jesus Christ.

There are a number of additional reasons for seeing the verses this way.

In verse 40 the angel speaks of /“the time of the end,” /(also v.35 & 12:4 & 9)/ /which is neither the time of Antiochus Epiphanes or the time of the early Roman Empire.

It refers to /the end of the world immediately before the final judgment/.

Again, the first verse of chapter 12 begins, /“At that time,”/ which means “at the time just described.”

But what is introduced in chapter 12? It is (1) a great persecution, (2) a general resurrection, (3) a final judgment, and (4) the final, eternal blessedness of the saints.

THAT POINTS IT TO “THE END.”

The end of time.

Most importantly, the Lord Jesus himself took these verses as applying to the last days.

In Matthew 24 and 25.

He said, /“There will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again”/ (Matt.

24:21).

In this section, Jesus’s only reference to the book of Daniel, he looks forward in v.15 to the /abomination of desolation/ predicted, not /backward/ to Antiochus’s profaning of the temple, but to the time of persecution immediately preceding his return.

That means (if correct) that the culminating prophesies in chapter 12 are describing the rise to power of a great tribulation of God’s people that is yet future to Antiochus.

That is how Jesus also interpreted it (I trust Him).

And the Apostle Paul speaks of the coming of a contemptible /“man of lawlessness … proclaiming himself to be God”/ with echoes of Daniel’s description (2 Thess.

2:3–4).

Also, the apostle John in the book of Revelation speaks of the coming beast who will /“utter blasphemies against God,” “make war on the saints,” and seduce “everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb”/ (Rev.

13:5–8)—all occurring before a final great battle and then for the saints are resurrected to everlasting life (Rev.

20).

What I am suggesting is that Antiochus Epiphanes is a /prototype/ of all that is “antichrist” to show us the pattern or the “spirit of the antichrist” (cf. 1 John 2:18; 4:3) in every age AND will culminate in greatest evil before the end of all ages.[3]

Add in Ezekiel 38 and taking them together, I find that they refer to a great final world war immediately prior to the Lord’s return.

Daniel refers to /a great battle between the kings of the North and the South/.

He mentions Egypt particularly as well as Libya and Nubia.

Ezekiel also mentions a group of southern nations, and he speaks of a great northern power.

If all of these are in the distant future for Daniel, the modern names would probably differ.

Speculation of the exact nations has been the subject of myrads of discussion and changes over the years of history as believers in each age try to determine /“if the end is in our day, who would they be?”/

I have never been convinced that this is profitable to do.

But when it does happen these nations will engage in a war, which in Revelation is called Armageddon (Nina stood in a place overlooking the valley of Meddigo when we were in Israel).

That war is the referenced in 12:1a, followed by the final victory when the Lord Jesus Christ returns, subdues his and our enemies, and ushers in a kingdom that shall never be overturned or destroyed (vv.

1b-4).

Hallelujah!

You are free to work out the details – you are bright people.

– and form groups and have fun at lunch over the names… and add in /1,290 days/* and the */ 1,335 days/* (Daniel 12:11–12).

* There are enough guesses on those that we would need an entire morning to go over them!

!! POSTLUDE

Starting in 12:5, begins the postlude to the vision, /which is another vision/.

And it contains a few more details of the main vision, but focuses on Daniel and his response in his remaining life (short).