In this chapter we have not merely the history of the Grecian successors of the great horn, by the relationships of the ships of Chittim with them; compare Num. 24:2424And ships shall come from the coast of Chittim, and shall afflict Asshur, and shall afflict Eber, and he also shall perish for ever. (Numbers 24:24). It is neither merely the character of the fourth beast, nor the actings of the great horn of the third, but the intrusion of the fourth into the territories of the third, associated with the consequences of this for the Jews. From verse 29, it is not as the former nor latter affairs regulated between the two, but the ships of Chittim come against the king of the North. This is a general idea (though I do not doubt as to the special circumstance commonly alluded to) thereon he returns, and has intelligence with those that forsake the holy covenant. Thereon comes in the passage which we know to be at the end, and which is, in any case parenthetical; verses 31, 30, and 32 following one on the other, and ' arms ' being the nominative to all the acts done in verse 31. The difficulty lies in the words mim-men-nu ya-a-mo-du (shall stand on his part). These 'arms' or 'material power' (see verse 6) shall stand up from him. They shall pollute and they shall take away the daily, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate. It is not 'he,' but 'they.' Verses 32-35 continue the course of ' his ' conduct, and the condition of the Jews in general, thence on to the end, of which we have here to notice that there are ' the intelligent, who instruct the many, and, besides the apostates who had forsaken the holy covenant, such as do wickedly against the covenant, who were corrupted by flatteries—that the people fall by the sword, etc., days—that there fall of the intelligent, that these may be tried through them, to the time of the end. These two facts—the separate fact of verse 31, and the condition of the Jews morally, and as to trial through to the end, constitute the revelation as to them in these chapters.
This chapter seems to me as simple as possible, as soon as we apply verses 30-35 to Antiochus Epiphanes, the Romans, and then the general state to the last days—its natural interpretation. Then the king in the last days comes in, naturally, in his place. Chapter 8 is more difficult for me. Still my impression is that it is not Antichrist, though I have nothing against it. My difficulty is the effect of the language. As a mere simple theory, it would make it easy. The force of "standing up against the Prince of princes" is to be considered; but it seems to me more earthly than Rev. 19.
24. ‘He shall enter into the peaceable and fat places,' etc., as in the margin.
30, etc. ‘For the ships of Chittim shall come,' etc. ‘And arms shall rise up from him,' either as a successor, or a constituted lieutenant; see verses 7 and 20. It is not al can-no (in his place); ‘And they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall remove' (he-si-ru, they shall remove)—take away, that it ceases to exist, as in Ezek. 21:31, 2631And I will pour out mine indignation upon thee, I will blow against thee in the fire of my wrath, and deliver thee into the hand of brutish men, and skilful to destroy. (Ezekiel 21:31)
26Thus saith the Lord God; Remove the diadem, and take off the crown: this shall not be the same: exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high. (Ezekiel 21:26); this and Dan. 8:1111Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. (Daniel 8:11), are used together. 'And they shall place the idol of the desolator,' or 'that desolateth.' And such as do wickedly [as to] the covenant, he shall seduce to apostasy by flatteries ' (or favors). ` And the people that know their God shall be strong and act. And the intelligent' (instructed) ` of the people shall cause the many to understand, and they shall fall by the sword,' etc., 'days." And some of the intelligent shall fall, to try by them,' etc., ‘to the time of the end.'
31. I apprehend this is literally, or rather historically, still Antiochus Epiphanes, or, however, the king of the North who is despised or vile. 'Arms' or ‘forces' from him, acting under or for him, take their stand and pollute the sanctuary, etc. Here we have something definite. These do not destroy it—that was the work of another; see Psa. 74 and 83. They do not confirm covenant—they desolate.
Note, the only epoch directly recognized of the Lord, as a division of time, is the “Abomination of desolation, or the last three and a half years." If there be a first three and a half, it does not enter into this part of the subject. It is placed, generally, among "the beginning of sorrows," not being of warning; as reply to the disciples' question, there may of course be special revelation in another point of view.
We must remark here that it is “the forces" (z'roim, literally ‘arms '). They, I suppose, who pollute the sanctuary of strength, and remove, or set aside, the daily. It appears to me that this passage opens out the Roman succession to Antiochus Epiphanes, the willful king among those who typically answered to him, and who was not the king of the North (which he was), nor the king of the South, but held the antitypical place to him. Hence the introduction of them in verse 35. He it was who brought the Romans into this position. They spring from him providentially, and he represented their final agency, and, to make this clear, it is said ‘They shall pollute,' etc. The final accomplishment, I doubt not, shall be in Antichrist. Chapter 8, I conceive to be the literal Northern Antitype to him. Note here, accordingly, though the Romans did so in their original capacity, it is not said, they cast down the place of the sanctuary, for it is not their part in their ultimate character, though the abomination of desolation may be set up, and every dishonor done to the Jews. This also, as compared with chapter 9, seems the secular power of the Roman, Antichristian set, whereas chapter 9 seems to be the Jewish aspect, as holding the place, to their opinions, of Messiah the Prince. Here, he is the king, doing according to his will, laying his hand, etc. There it is about the covenant and the like, though he may be identified in act, in either character.
33. Ya-vi-nu la-rab-bim (will teach the multitude). The only case, I am aware of, of the dative of persons without accusative of thing; compare Job 6:2424Teach me, and I will hold my tongue: and cause me to understand wherein I have erred. (Job 6:24).
Then comes verse 36—the specialty of revelation, as to the depository of power in that day, the king; see the difference of chapter 12: 6 and 8: 13. It is the concentering of apostate power in an individual, acting in its energy, not merely as in chapter 7 morally rising up, but his acting as an earthly power in this character, or who had this character.
The king is mentioned there three times in prophecy—Isaiah 30:3333For Tophet is ordained of old; yea, for the king it is prepared; he hath made it deep and large: the pile thereof is fire and much wood; the breath of the Lord, like a stream of brimstone, doth kindle it. (Isaiah 30:33); chap. 57: 9, and here. In Isaiah 30:3333For Tophet is ordained of old; yea, for the king it is prepared; he hath made it deep and large: the pile thereof is fire and much wood; the breath of the Lord, like a stream of brimstone, doth kindle it. (Isaiah 30:33), it would seem a distinct person from the Assyrian who is there also. In chapter 57: 9, he is named also without explanation, but it is probably, as to the letter, Egypt, see Hos. 12:11Ephraim feedeth on wind, and followeth after the east wind: he daily increaseth lies and desolation; and they do make a covenant with the Assyrians, and oil is carried into Egypt. (Hosea 12:1), but that is not the object of the prophecy. ' The king' seems someone recognized in that position, either as the one to whom God had entrusted empire or power in His place, or one whom the Jews have connected with themselves on that principle, and this I suppose to be the case here, and hence called 'the king.' That he may be in possession of Babylon, and the territories of the king of the North, so as to come in in succession here in the subjects this chapter treats of, is highly probable. Also he will seize Egypt, but this is not his principal character, though it takes its place here. He is the king. He prospers—not exists merely—till the indignation be accomplished. But cessation of indignation is not yet restoration; compare Isaiah to: 5, 25 and chap. 28: 14, 15; compare also chap. 20:6, and Dan. 8:1919And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be. (Daniel 8:19). I cannot doubt that this is the last character of the king who exalts himself above all, but, though characterized thus, it is his actings as a conqueror, specially in the countries bordering on Judaea.
Here we have the full character of ' the king ' at the end, who, in effect, has fully accomplished verse 31, as we see from chapter 12: II. He sets aside all true and traditional religion or hope, even as a Jew, of Messiah. But he sets up a false god—he will make a new religion. He will establish his instruments (not named, but connected with eloah mauzzim—the god of forces, A.V.) over the land.
The question then arises, Is it the same as the little horn of chapter 7? He certainly has the same character of self-aggrandizement and blasphemy, and it would seem that he is the wicked one of 2 Thess. 2. In Dan. 7:2626But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end. (Daniel 7:26), the dominion is considered as his, though he be not the beast, because we are in connection with Jews. It was he persecuted the saints. One would be led to think that the second beast of Rev. 13 is the same personage. The first beast having the public corporate imperial power of the West set up by Satan as the vessel of power, and subsequently object of adoration. God being abandoned, it is no wonder, no more than the emperors did before, only apostasy will do it more decidedly.
It might seem difficult to suppose that he, who set up as God in the Temple, should come to worship another, but it would appear from Dan. 11 That these two features do exist. He exalts himself against the true God, and, though he may act as Darius, for awhile, some sort of religion is necessary for his followers. And he practices with this, though as between himself and God, it is blasphemy. Satan is habitually forced to keep up appearance of worshipping some other known object.
45. 'Between the sea and the mountain.'