Daniel 11 & 12 historically explained step by step.

[Revelation Man]

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

I watch too many YouTube vids. He's a TV character and his title is King of the North.

Gottcha 

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

4 hours ago, Daniel 11:36 said:

You are wrong on this issue Diaste .... there are only two kings involved, the king of the north and king of the south

Yeah, I used to think that as well, "That can't be right...only two kings." But no one has yet proven, with scripture, the KOTN is the same as the willful king.

If you can, please do. I'm never wrong when I allow scripture to correct my thinking. 

It's rather obvious to me, via the whole Syrian Wars we are taken through that its always the King of the North vs. the King of the South. That's why I placed the First Map of the Syrian Wars up in the OP. Thus the last End Time Battle is described in like manner. 

Via the Holman Christian Standard Bible we get only TWO HEADERS via the whole chapter. 

Daniel 11:1 In the first year of Darius the Mede, I stood up to strengthen and protect him. 2 Now I will tell you the truth.

Prophecies about Persia and Greece

“Three more kings will arise in Persia, and the fourth will be far richer than the others. By the power he gains through his riches, he will stir up everyone against the kingdom of Greece. 3 Then a warrior king will arise; he will rule a vast realm and do whatever he wants. 4 But as soon as he is established, his kingdom will be broken up and divided to the four winds of heaven, but not to his descendants; it will not be the same kingdom that he ruled, because his kingdom will be uprooted and will go to others besides them.

Kings of the South and the North

No use posting the whole chapter of course, I was just pointing out that every other battle i the chapter seems to be the KOTN vs. the KOTS, there is only TWO HEADERS  in the whole chapter, so that is what the HSCB Version thinks on this. 

We know Antiochus Epiphanes dies around verse 32, then we get this: 

Daniel 11:32 With flattery he (AE4) will corrupt those who act wickedly toward the covenant, but the people who know their God will be strong and take action (Maccabean Revolt). 33 Those who are wise among the people will give understanding to many, yet they will die by sword and flame, and be captured and plundered for a time. 34 When defeated, they will be helped by some, but many others will join them insincerely. 35 Some of the wise will fall so that they may be refined, purified, and cleansed until the TIME OF THE END, for it will still come at the appointed time. ( The Anti-Christ is End Time, we have just transitioned from AE4 to the End Time Beast. )

36 “Then the king (Anti-Christ) will do whatever he wants. He will exalt and magnify himself above every god, and he will say outrageous things against the God of gods. He will be successful until the time of wrath is completed,because what has been decreed will be accomplished. 37 He will not show regard for the gods[q] of his fathers, the god longed for by women, or for any other god, because he will magnify himself above all. 38 Instead, he will honor a god of fortresses—a god his fathers did not know—with gold, silver, precious stones, and riches. 39 He will deal with the strongest fortresses with the help of a foreign god. He will greatly honor those who acknowledge him,[r] making them rulers over many and distributing land as a reward.

40 “At the time of the end, the king of the South will engage him in battle, but the king of the North will storm against him with chariots, horsemen, and many ships. He will invade countries and sweep through them like a flood. 41 He will also invade the beautiful land, and many will fall. But these will escape from his power: Edom, Moab, and the prominent people of the Ammonites. 42 He will extend his power against the countries, and not even the land of Egypt will escape. 43 He will get control over the hidden treasures of gold and silver and over all the riches of Egypt. The Libyans and Cushites will also be in submission.[t] 44 But reports from the east and the north will terrify him, and he will go out with great fury to annihilate and completely destroy many. 45 He will pitch his royal tents between the sea and the beautiful holy mountain, but he will meet his end with no one to help him.

Now you and many others say that verse 36 can't be the King of the North, or it would have stated as much in verse 36, but it says THE KING WILL thus hes a WILLFUL KING, it says HE, HE, HE over and over then in verse 40 it says the King of the South will push at him........NOW LOOK BELOW, do you think Antiochus is the King of the North? Well the EXACT SAME THING HAPPENS !! Antiochus is not called the King of the North until verse 28, thus it goes 7 verses without calling Antiochus Epiphanes the KOTN, yet you do not acknowledge the PATTERN of the writer Daniel there, nor do you doubt he is the King of the North in that instance !! But there IS NO DIFFERENCE !!

Daniel 11:21 “In his place a despised person (Vile Person) will arise; royal honors will not be given to him, but he will come during a time of peace and seize the kingdom by intrigue. 22 A flood of forces will be swept away before him; they will be shattered, as well as the covenant prince. 23 After an alliance is made with him, he will act deceitfully. He will rise to power with a small nation. 24 During a time of peace, he will come into the richest parts of the province and do what his fathers and predecessors never did. He will lavish plunder, loot, and wealth on his followers, and he will make plans against fortified cities, but only for a time.

25 “With a large army he will stir up his power and his courage against the king of the South. The king of the South will prepare for battle with an extremely large and powerful army, but he will not succeed, because plots will be made against him. 26 Those who eat his provisions will destroy him; his army will be swept away, and many will fall slain. 27 The two kings, whose hearts are bent on evil, will speak lies at the same table but to no avail, for still the end will come at the appointed time.28 The king of the North will return to his land with great wealth, but his heart will be set against the holy covenant;[n] he will take action, then return to his own land.

So just like verses 36-39 verses 21-27 go by without ANY MENTION of the King of the North, he is spoken of without the TITLE King of the North, thus what makes you think the prophet Daniel is not also speaking about the King of the North in verses 36-39 but that he is speaking about the King of the North in verses 21-27?  

It seems Daniel speaks in vernacular generalities until he starts speaking about the Battles these two "sdes' have, then he speaks of them via the King of the South vs. the King of the North. 

So the Anti-Christ in verse 36 is, IMHO, the King of the North. 

God Bless.....

Edited June 18, 2018 by Revelation Man

[Daniel 11:36]

"there are only two kings involved, the king of the north and king of the south"

 

There are only two kings Diaste .... and the north one is the anitchrist

This setting is a continuation of the conflict between Antiochus IV and Egypt played out during the coming 70th week decreed for Israel

Only two kings are involved, not three

Where did you get this idea?

Edited June 18, 2018 by Daniel 11:36

[Diaste]

I thought I laid it out earlier. When I can get to my laptop I'll post something more complete.

[Diaste]

3 hours ago, Daniel 11:36 said:

"there are only two kings involved, the king of the north and king of the south"

 

There are only two kings Diaste .... and the north one is the anitchrist

This setting is a continuation of the conflict between Antiochus IV and Egypt played out during the coming 70th week decreed for Israel

Only two kings are involved, not three

Where did you get this idea?

From the top we are treated to an iteration of a portion of Daniel 8,

"21 And the rough goat [is] the king of Grecia: and the great horn that [is] between his eyes [is] the first king. 22Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power."

Dan 11

" ...the realm of Grecia. 3 And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will. 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:"

These are parallel and highly important. Dan 11 starts with the Persian kings giving way to Alexander and then to the Diadochi which then are spread out in the cardinal directions. We all know the four Generals formed their realms in these directions and even know who went where: Lysimachus in the north, Cassander in the west, Ptolemy in the south, and Seleucid points east from the Levant. I cannot leave this context during the reading of the rest of the passage. If you can provide evidence why I should then please do so.

That being said it's a vital piece of info and this was given to Daniel by an angel of the Lord in ch.8 and then again by the Lord himself in the beginning of the vision in ch 11. When the vision of ch. 8 explains where the beast comes from, the two of us agreeing on the Seleucid empire, why forget that same understanding in ch. 11 when the Lord begins by refreshing our memory? 

To my mind the identity of the northern king must be gleaned from history. That history tells us it's Lysimachus in Asia Minor. In Dan 11, " and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north, and shall deal against them, and shall prevail: 8 And shall also carry captives into Egypt their gods, with their princes,", Egypt is identified. This is the southern king. Why would we assume the eastern kingdom is north when we know one of the Generals controlled a northern region?  I don't know when the above occurred but with a little looking... No matter.

With Egypt identified as the KOTS, history telling us Asia Minor is the residence of Lysimachus, and with the Syrian wars being fought between these two, and knowing Dan 11 leads to Seleucid origins of the beast, why is there not a third king? 

Forgive the musing...

Something changes here, "14 And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall. 15 So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities: and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people,neither [shall there be any] strength to withstand. 16 But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him:"

The KOTS has fallen to the KOTN. But then a 'he' comes to do his own will and NONE SHALL STAND. This 'he' comes against the KOTN. See? The KOTN came and did his thing, and then another came against him. The KOTN is right there taking cities from a powerless south and is now in control but an even more powerful one arrives to come against him. The KOTN is the object of verse 16. Or would you say the KOTN comes against himself? It can't be the KOTN coming against the already powerless and defeated KOTS. It's a new player. The Eastern king, from the land which gives rise to the beast.

The 'him' from v 40 is the described personage from v 36-39, a direct antecedent to v 40. If this was the KOTN in v 36-39 then the king of the north would fight against himself. 

It's a mess I know. Probably makes no sense.

 

 

 

[Daniel 11:36]

"It's a mess I know. Probably makes no sense"

 

Only a mess for you .... there are only two kings in the setting at the time of the end .... the king of the north,

and the king of the south

[Diaste]

6 hours ago, Daniel 11:36 said:

"It's a mess I know. Probably makes no sense"

 

Only a mess for you .... there are only two kings in the setting at the time of the end .... the king of the north,

and the king of the south

Perhaps, but it doesn't look that way. Current world events suggest that the KOTN and the KOTS have a common enemy in the form of ISIS, which arose in the ancient kingdom of the Seleucids in Mesopotamia. 

If you want to convince me just saying it won't make a great case. 

[Revelation Man]

8 hours ago, Diaste said:

Perhaps, but it doesn't look that way. Current world events suggest that the KOTN and the KOTS have a common enemy in the form of ISIS, which arose in the ancient kingdom of the Seleucids in Mesopotamia. 

If you want to convince me just saying it won't make a great case. 

As I pointed out above brother, Antiochus is not called the King of the North until verse 28, why do you not doubt him being the KOTN?   The reason the KOTN and the KOTS don't have a common interest is one is the European Beast and the other is a conglomeration of Kings to the South, maybe Turkey and Iran, maybe Turkey and a few Middle East Countries, maybe just Turkey, then the battle is engaged and the KOTN crushes the whole region.

One bad spoke leads to another and another until the wheel is off kilter as per the balance, likewise if you get ONE THING WRONG in a Prophetic uttering, it of course is going to effect the whole prophecy. 

Edited June 19, 2018 by Revelation Man

[Daniel 11:36]

"Perhaps, but it doesn't look that way. Current world events suggest that the KOTN and the KOTS have a common enemy in the form of ISIS, which arose in the ancient kingdom of the Seleucids in Mesopotamia. 

If you want to convince me just saying it won't make a great case"

 

Only two kings son .... just two

I have read about your renderings from other sources and I am telling you that you are dead wrong

And Revelation Man is wrong as well .... but for a different reason .... Rome is not a part of Bible prophecy at all

[JoeChan82]

19 hours ago, Diaste said:

I thought I laid it out earlier. When I can get to my laptop I'll post something more complete.

Before you reply again, you might want to check out this link. 

http://www.bibleprophecy.com/did-daniel-9-predict-the-coming-of-jesus-or-antiochus-epiphanes/

[Diaste]

1 hour ago, Revelation Man said:

As I pointed out above brother, Antiochus is not called the King of the North until verse 28, why do you not doubt him being the KOTN?   The reason the KOTN and the KOTS don't have a common interest is one is the European Beast and the other is a conglomeration of Kings to the South, maybe Turkey and Iran, maybe Turkey and a few Middle East Countries, maybe just Turkey, then the battle is engaged and the KOTN cruses the whole region. One bad spoke leads to another and another until the wheel is off kilter as per the balance, likewise if you get ONE THING WRONG in a Prophetic uttering, it of course is going t effect the whole prophecy. 

That's fine, but how does one let go of the idea the diadochi divided the kingdom in the cardinal directions, and we are reminded of this at the beginning of this prophecy?

Does it not make sense to keep this in mind when assaying the prophecy? 

Egypt is identified as the KOTS. This is one of the areas of the diadochi. A simple solution would be to interpret the KOTN with one of the diadochi hence, Lysimachus and Asia Minor.

During the Syrian wars wasn't the KOTS in control of Syria? Not sure but I think that is the case.

Anyway, my understanding allows for the beast to come from one of the diadochi, and since only one of the diadochi ruled the same region with the same capital city as the three kings before him, the beast comes from the Mideast; and that would not allow for him to be king of the north.

Unless I'm wrong and he is called king of the north. But just repeating the same thing over and over is not convincing.

Part of the problem is the continued insistence on Rome as a player. This is not supported by scripture. I can't take prophetic interpretation serious if its Roman based.