🤦♂️
The King of the North as you Never Heard ity Explained Before
by raymond frantz 32 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Jeffro
Vidqun:
Thus, the following passage cannot apply to Antiochus, for he died of illness: "And he shall pitch his palatial tents between the sea and the glorious holy mountain. Yet he shall come to his end, with none to help him." (Dan. 11:45 ESV)
When Antiochus IV went to fight east of Syria, he left Lysias in charge against the Maccabees. What was the location that Antiochus had established where Lysias and the army were encamped? Emmaus. Where is that? It's "between the sea and the glorious holy mountain".
-
TonusOH
blondie: at one time around 2020, some "Christian" religions suggested Trump was the Antichrist.
I never did understand how Trump held on to his following among evangelicals. I can understand why they would have voted for him instead of Clinton or Biden or (lol) Harris. But this is a man whose life doesn't track with their beliefs. When he was recorded making his "grab them by the pussy" comment, I thought the far more damning part was before that, when he talked about trying to seduce a married woman for no other reason than wanting sex.
And here we are today, and he's standing at a pulpit talking about how god wanted him to be President, or whatever it is he was talking about. The fact that he hasn't been incinerated by a bolt of lightning tells me that god either doesn't exist, or is eternally patient.
-
Vidqun
Jeffro, for a Biblically based exegesis one takes the language as is: “He will pitch his royal tents between the seas toward the beautiful holy mountain. But he will come to his end, with no one to help him.” (Dan. 11:45 NET).
Take note, יַמִּ֖ים jammim “seas” (plural). What does it mean? Isaiah explains the symbolic use of “sea:” “But the wicked are like a surging sea that is unable to be quiet; its waves toss up mud and sand.” (Isa. 57:20; cf. 17:12). So, seas = people. Which mountain is he referring to? How about this one: “many peoples will come and say, "Come, let us go up to the LORD's mountain, to the temple of the God of Jacob, so he can teach us his requirements, and we can follow his standards." (Isa. 2:3; cf. Mic. 4:2). So the last King of the North will work hard to prevent people from reaching God’s symbolic mountain. Later we see, he will certainly fail.
But for your secular exegesis one needs “hyperbolic, open ended and superstitious phrasing” in order to force the meaning and vocabulary of the passage to fit your historical construction.The Maccabees also attempted to apply the book to their time (cf. Dan. 9:24-27). Jesus pointed out their mistake by applying the prophecy to the time of the Romans, to accurately reflect their actions.
So when we read the following, we don't have to revert to “hyperbolic, open ended and superstitious phrasing.” We take it quite literally:
The angel Gabriel informs Daniel: “Understand, O son of man, that the vision is for the time of [the] end” [“the end time,” NAB] (Dan. 8:17b). He continues: “Here I am causing you to know what will occur in the final part [’acharith] of the denunciation, because it is for the appointed time of the end.” The “final part of the denunciation” refers to God’s anger during “the time of the end” (Dan. 8:19, 25; 11:36; cf. Rev. 14:19; 15:1). The small horn/fierce king will rise “in the final part [’acharith] of their kingdom, as the transgressors act to completion” (cf. Dan. 8:23). The small horn/fierce king will come to his end “but not by human agency” (Dan. 8:25 NET; cf. Rev. 19:11-21). Gabriel concludes: “And the vision of the evening and the morning that has been told is true. And as for you, seal up the vision, because it is for many days” [“it concerns the distant future,” NIV].
-
Duran
[ 19 Then he said: “Here I am causing you to know what will happen in the final part of the denunciation, because it is for the appointed time of the end.]
[ 31 And arms will stand up, proceeding from him; and they will profane the sanctuary, the fortress, and remove the constant feature.“And they will put in place the disgusting thing that causes desolation.32 “And those who act wickedly against the covenant, he will lead into apostasy by means of smooth words. But the people who know their God will prevail and act effectively. 33 And those having insight among the people will impart understanding to the many. And they will be made to stumble by sword and by flame, by captivity and by plundering, for some days. 36 “The king will do as he pleases, and he will exalt himself and magnify himself above every god; and against the God of gods he will speak astonishing things. And he will prove successful until the denunciation comes to a finish; because what is determined must take place.]
[23 “And in the final part of their kingdom, as the transgressors act to a completion, a fierce-looking king who understands ambiguous sayings will stand up. 24 His power will become great, but not through his own power. He will bring ruin in an extraordinary way, and he will be successful and act effectively. He will bring mighty ones to ruin, also the people made up of the holy ones. 25 And by his cunning he will use deception to succeed; and in his heart he will exalt himself; and during a time of security he will bring many to ruin. He will even stand up against the Prince of princes, but he will be broken without human hand.]
__________
The 'appointed time of the end' is the 42 months that the KOTN/DT/small horn/fierce king/MOL/8th king is given power and will prove successful until he is broken without human hand/throw into the fiery lake when Jesus comes after those 42 months. Those 42 months are what is known as the judgment on the house of God and is the time of GT upon them. (1 Peter 4:17;Luke 21:24;Rev 11:2,3;13:5,7,10 Rev 19:19-21;2 Thessalonians 1:7-10) -
Jeffro
Vidqun:
Jeffro, for a Biblically based exegesis one takes the language as is:
For a valid analysis, one considers the actual context in which the work was written, including historical, political, cultural and religious factors, and the genre of the work. The blatantly obvious relation of Daniel to the Maccabean period makes other interpretations plainly absurd. But you can stick to your funny little superstitions and your trite interpretations that predictably put the ‘time of the end’ in ‘our time’🙄—wow, what a coincidence! 🤣
So when we read the following, we don't have to revert to “hyperbolic, open ended and superstitious phrasing.” We take it quiteliterally:
I bet they’re crafting palatial tents as we speak.
-
Jeffro
Vidqun:
Take note, יַמִּ֖ים jammim “seas” (plural). What does it mean? Isaiah explains the symbolic use of “sea:”
It’s really funny how you get to arbitrarily decide what’s taken literally. 🤦♂️ When it’s shown directly that the tents were literally between the great sea and the holy mountain, suddenly we need to jump into symbolism from Isaiah. 🤣 May Elohim (plural) forgive you.
-
Jeffro
raymond frantz:
First of all, there is an ambiguity in the use of the pronoun, … This unclear pronoun ("him") suggests a distinct third party, separate from the king of the South and the king of the North.
First of all, this isn’t really a new take on interpreting the ‘kings’ at all. This is recycling Adventist interpretations of Daniel from the 19th and early 20th century (including, but not limited to or originating with, Charles Taze Russell), which portrayed Napoleon as a ‘third king’.
The ‘ambiguity’ isn’t particularly ambiguous when the whole context indicates two ‘kings’ interacting with each other:
At the time of the end, the King of the South will engage with [the king of the North] in a pushing, and against [the king of the South], the King of the North will storm with chariots and horsemen…
It is neither new nor surprising that someone is attempting to reinvigorate the tedious superstitions about the passage, as usual seeking to apply it to ‘our day’. -
raymond frantz
Jeffro
Your concern regarding the interpretation of a third king in Daniel 11:40 is appreciated, but it is important to clarify why this is not a mere repetition of Adventist or 19th-century interpretations, nor a "tedious superstition." The argument for a third party in this passage is rooted in the clear structure and context of Daniel 11 itself.
-
The Pronoun Issue:
You argue that the pronoun "him" is not ambiguous, but a careful reading of the Hebrew text suggests otherwise. The passage states:"At the time of the end, the king of the South will engage with [him] in a pushing, and against [him] the king of the North will storm with chariots and horsemen…"
If the conflict were exclusively between the king of the North and the king of the South, we would expect more explicit parallelism, such as “the king of the South will engage with the king of the North,” rather than the ambiguous him. This linguistic structure opens the possibility that "him" refers to a third entity distinct from the two kings.
-
Consistency with the Previous Verses:
The interpretation of a third figure is not arbitrary—it aligns with the pattern established earlier in Daniel 11. Previous verses describe multiple powers influencing and intervening in the affairs of the North and South. The passage has repeatedly introduced new figures, such as rulers, alliances, and invading forces that shift the balance of power. This contextual precedent suggests that the mention of a third entity at the "time of the end" is entirely in keeping with the passage’s literary and historical patterns. -
Historical Considerations:
While some 19th-century interpretations associated this with Napoleon, the concept of a third power in Daniel 11:40 is not limited to that historical application. Many scholars recognize that geopolitical struggles often involve more than two dominant players, particularly in biblical prophecy, where external forces frequently disrupt the North-South conflict. The claim that this is a "recycled" idea does not negate its validity, nor does it address the textual indications of a third entity. -
Avoiding the “Superstition” Charge:
To dismiss this interpretation as "tedious superstition" overlooks the fact that careful exegetical work has led multiple scholars and interpreters to consider the presence of a third power. The tendency to apply prophecy to contemporary times is not necessarily an error—it is a recognition that biblical prophecy often speaks beyond the immediate historical moment, extending to future events. The passage itself speaks of "the time of the end," indicating that its fulfillment may transcend ancient history.
The argument for a third king in Daniel 11:40 is not an arbitrary reinterpretation nor a relic of 19th-century Adventist thought. It arises from a careful reading of the text, recognizing patterns from previous verses, and understanding the complex nature of prophetic conflict. The idea should be evaluated based on textual evidence rather than dismissed as mere superstition.
-
-
Jeffro
No. It is superstition, it is an adaptation of an interpretation employed by earlier Adventists, and it is yet another attempt to portray the stories in Daniel as relevant for 'our day'.
It arises from a careful reading of the text, recognizing patterns from previous verses, and understanding the complex nature of prophetic conflict.
It arises from desperately wanting it to be a 'prophecy' relevant to 'our day' rather than a description of past events in the apocalyptic genre.