Sermon Tone Analysis
Overall tone of the sermon
This automated analysis scores the text on the likely presence of emotional, language, and social tones. There are no right or wrong scores; this is just an indication of tones readers or listeners may pick up from the text.
A score of 0.5 or higher indicates the tone is likely present.
Emotion Tone
Anger
0.07UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.09UNLIKELY
Fear
0.09UNLIKELY
Joy
0.53LIKELY
Sadness
0.16UNLIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.63LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.25UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.92LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.81LIKELY
Extraversion
0.11UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.27UNLIKELY
Emotional Range
0.71LIKELY
Tone of specific sentences
Tones
Emotion
Language
Social Tendencies
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
The God of Time & Eternity
()
I- GOD’S KNOWLEDGE OF THE FUTURE HELPS ME TO CONFIDENTLY TRUST HIM.
()
A- God knows what “time” holds because it is all “present” with Him.
1.
The details of prophecy and history fit hand-in-glove.
a.
In the previous section the vision was introduced; now its contents are revealed—a history of key events leading up to the end.
Gabriel begins with the Persian period, the time in which Daniel was then living, making reference to four of its kings (v.
2).
Next he describes the Greek Empire under Alexander and its subsequent division into four sections after the great conqueror’s death (vv.
3–4).
Two of these divisions, the Ptolemaic and the Seleucid, receive special attention because of their important relationship to Israel (vv.
5–20).
Palestine was located between them and was controlled first by the Ptolemies and then the Seleucids.
b.
The historical material in 11:2–20, however, is in reality an introduction to the exceptionally wicked persecutor of the Jews, Antiochus IV Epiphanes (vv.
21–35).
Following Antiochus, Gabriel provides a description of the most villainous tyrant that Israel (and the world) will ever encounter, the eschatological Antichrist (vv.
36–45).
The vision concludes with a characterization of Antichrist’s reign of terror as the worst period in human history and a promise of deliverance and blessing for the saints (12:1–3).
Emphasis is therefore placed on the activities of two individuals, Antiochus and Antichrist.
c.
The historical details set forth in this prophecy are astounding.
Wood asserts: “The detail of this history as presented provides one of the most remarkable predictive portions of all Scripture.”44
Of course, the Bible records many other exact predictions made far in advance of their fulfillment.45
2 “Now then, I will reveal the truth to you.
Three more Persian kings will reign, to be succeeded by a fourth, far richer than the others.
He will use his wealth to stir up everyone to fight against the kingdom of Greece.
These Persian kings are speaking of those who reigned after Babylon was taken by Cyrus.
Those were Cambyses (530-522 B.C.); Pseudo-Smerdis (522 B.C.); and Darius I Hystaspes (522-486 B.C.).
The fourth is Xerxes I, called Ahasuerus in Esther (486-465 B.C.).
Kings after Xerxes are not included, probably because Xerxes’ failed military campaign against the Greeks (481-479 B.C.).
sounded the beginning of the end for Persia, which finally fell (331 B.C.), to Alexander the Great.
3 “Then a mighty king will rise to power who will rule with great authority and accomplish everything he sets out to do.
4 But at the height of his power, his kingdom will be broken apart and divided into four parts.
It will not be ruled by the king’s descendants, nor will the kingdom hold the authority it once had.
For his empire will be uprooted and given to others.
11:3 Scholars agree that the “mighty king” of v. 3 was Alexander the Great (336–323 b.c.), the ruler who brought about the downfall of the Persian Empire.
The description of his exploits and his kingdom are unmistakable.
Moreover, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, a Seleucid-Greek ruler, proceeded out of one of the four divisions of this mighty king’s realm (cf.
vv.
21–24).
Thus the “mighty king” was the first ruler of the Greek Empire, Alexander, who launched his attack against Medo-Persia in 334 b.c. and completed his victory of that empire by 331 b.c.
After conquering much of the known world, he died in the city of Babylon in 323 b.c., evidently of a fever.
11:4 Upon Alexander’s death, his empire came to be divided into four sections (cf.
8:8) by his military commanders.
The rulers were commonly known as the “Diadochi,” which means “successors” (cf.
7:6 and 8:8).
Alexander’s sons (Alexander IV and Herakles) were both murdered, so no part of his empire went to “his descendants.”
None of the divisions of the Greek Empire ever rivaled the combined strength of Alexander’s dominion.
5 “The king of the south will increase in power, but one of his own officials will become more powerful than he and will rule his kingdom with great strength.
11:5 In vv.
5–12 the period of Ptolemaic dominance is recounted.
The “king of the South” (v. 5) is a reference to Ptolemy I Soter (323–285 b.c.), the ruler of Egypt (cf.
v. 8, where the king of the south’s land is stated to be Egypt) who had been a highly capable general under Alexander.
“One of his commanders” alludes to Seleucus I Nicator (312/311–280 b.c.), who had been a lesser general under Alexander.
He was appointed satrap of Babylonia in 321 b.c., but when another general, Antigonus, seized Babylonia, Seleucus fled (in 316 b.c.) to Ptolemy Soter in Egypt to serve under him, thus becoming “one of his commanders.”
Antigonus was defeated in 312 b.c. at Gaza, and Seleucus returned to his former satrapy; there he greatly increased his power, eventually controlling more territory than Ptolemy.
With the inception of Seleucus’s rule, the “Seleucid era” was inaugurated.
Seleucus’s kingdom included Babylonia, Syria, and Media.
According to Arrian,47 it was the largest of all the divisions of the Greek Empire.
6 “Some years later an alliance will be formed between the king of the north and the king of the south.
The daughter of the king of the south will be given in marriage to the king of the north to secure the alliance, but she will lose her influence over him, and so will her father.
She will be abandoned along with her supporters.
The king of Egypt shall enter into the kingdom of the north to make an agreement.
It appears, a daughter tries to marry, to help the agreement to be signed.
She is not accepted, and neither is the agreement signed.
The expedition is a failure.
Berenice, daughter of Egypt’s Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285-246 B.C.), married Syria’s King Antiochus II Theos (261-246 B.C.).
The latter part of the verse refers to the political advantage they hoped the alliance would produce.
Antiochus divorced his wife to marry Berenice.
Later that divorced wife murdered Berenice, her baby son, and even Antiochus by poisoning him.
Thus she brought her own son, Seleucus II Callinicus, to the throne.
7 But when one of her relatives becomes king of the south, he will raise an army and enter the fortress of the king of the north and defeat him.
8 When he returns to Egypt, he will carry back their idols with him, along with priceless articles of gold and silver.
For some years afterward he will leave the king of the north alone.
9 “Later the king of the north will invade the realm of the king of the south but will soon return to his own land.
11:7 “One from her [Berenice’s] family line” points to Berenice’s brother, Ptolemy III Euergetes (246–221 b.c.), who succeeded his father, Philadelphus, to the throne of Egypt.
“To take her place” reads literally “in his place,” and Montgomery probably is correct in understanding the phrase to indicate that Ptolemy III would rule “in his father’s [Ptolemy II’s] place.”49
In retaliation for his sister’s murder, Ptolemy III attacked Syria (“the king of the North”) with a great army.
This war lasted from 246 to 241 b.c.
during the course of which Ptolemy even captured and looted the Seleucid capital of Antioch.
The Egyptian king soundly defeated the Syrian forces and evidently put the evil Laodice to death.
11:8 Ptolemy seized Syria’s “gods” and other valuables.
He also returned to Egypt treasures, including sacred idols, taken by the Persian monarch Cambyses in 524 b.c.; for this feat the native Egyptians bestowed upon Ptolemy III the title “Euergetes [Benefactor].”50
Ptolemy made a peace treaty with Seleucus II in 240 b.c. in order to pursue his Aegean conquests.
11:9 For both grammatical and historical reasons, it is best to take “the king of the North” (NIV, NASB, NRSV, NKJV) as the subject of v. 9 rather than “the king of the South” (KJV).
There is no record that Seleucus II ever attempted an invasion of Egypt proper.
Evidently this campaign was brief with a swift “retreat” to Syria.
10 However, the sons of the king of the north will assemble a mighty army that will advance like a flood and carry the battle as far as the enemy’s fortress.
11 “Then, in a rage, the king of the south will rally against the vast forces assembled by the king of the north and will defeat them.
12 After the enemy army is swept away, the king of the south will be filled with pride and will execute many thousands of his enemies.
But his success will be short lived.
13 “A few years later the king of the north will return with a fully equipped army far greater than before.
14 At that time there will be a general uprising against the king of the south.
Violent men among your own people will join them in fulfillment of this vision, but they will not succeed.
15 Then the king of the north will come and lay siege to a fortified city and capture it.
The best troops of the south will not be able to stand in the face of the onslaught.
16 “The king of the north will march onward unopposed; none will be able to stop him.
He will pause in the glorious land of Israel, intent on destroying it.
17 He will make plans to come with the might of his entire kingdom and will form an alliance with the king of the south.
He will give him a daughter in marriage in order to overthrow the kingdom from within, but his plan will fail.
18 “After this, he will turn his attention to the coastland and conquer many cities.
But a commander from another land will put an end to his insolence and cause him to retreat in shame.
19 He will take refuge in his own fortresses but will stumble and fall and be seen no more.
20 “His successor will send out a tax collector to maintain the royal splendor.
But after a very brief reign, he will die, though not from anger or in battle.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9