Daniel Notes - Chapter 8

I. Verses 1-2 "In the third year of the reign of king Belshazzar a vision appeared unto me, even unto me Daniel, after that which appeared unto me at the first. 2 And I saw in a vision; and it came to pass, when I saw, that I was at Shushan in the palace, which is in the province of Elam; and I saw in a vision, and I was by the river of Ulai."

1. Vs. 1: The visions of this chapter came about two or three years after the previous chapter. The beginning narrative refers specifically to the previous vision, suggesting at least some remote connection between the two. One notable comparison between the two chapters is the use of beasts to represent kingdoms and horns to represent kings.

2. Vs. 2: Shushan of the province of Elam was just north of the Persian Gulf. It is in the general region of Ur, Abraham’s original home land. It does not appear this was the main seat of Babylonian government. However, it was a seat for, at least, provincial government, if not larger governmental functions.

II. Verses 3-14 "Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last. 4 I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; so that no beasts might stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will, and became great. 5 And as I was considering, behold, an he goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes. 6 And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing before the river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power. 7 And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand. 8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven. 9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land. 10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them. 11 Yea, 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. 12 And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised, and prospered. 13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? 14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed."

1. Vs. 3-4: There are several key elements in the description of this ram. Note these following observations.

A. The ram had two horns.

B. One of the two horns was higher than the other.

C. The higher horn came up last, that is, after the shorter horn.

D. The ram pushed in all directions with no other beast being able to withstand his advance.

2. Vs. 5-7: The male goat has several important features in his description as well.

A. The male goat came toward the ram from the west.

B. As he advanced, his feet did not touch the ground, i.e., he was flying.

C. He had one notable horn between his eyes.

D. The male goat resoundingly defeated the ram, breaking his horns and leaving him powerless.

3. Vs. 8: When the goat became powerful the notable horn broke and four grew up in its place. These four horns grew toward the four winds, in four directions.

4. Vs. 9-12: A little horn grew out of one of these four horns. The little horn became great, going toward the south, the east, and the pleasant land. It cast down some of the host and the stars and stomped them. It caused the daily sacrifice to cease and cast down the truth while prospering.

5. Vs. 13-14: The little horn would cast down the host and suppress the daily sacrifice for 2300 evenings and mornings. After this time had passed the temple would be vindicated. The ordinary Hebrew word for "day" does not appear in this verse. There are actually two words translated "days" here. They literally mean "evenings" and "mornings". Note verse 26 where this is labeled the vision of the evening and the morning. The word translated "cleansed" can carry the idea of justification or vindication. Note how it is used in Job 32:2 and Job 33:32. In both cases the idea of vindication is implied. From this we might gather the cleansing of the temple would include more than just removing something that profaned it. Note that verse 25 speaks of this king (the little horn) being broken, or dying. Some suggest the cleansing or vindication of the temple must include the death of the one who profaned it. See notes on verse 26.

III. Verses 15-27 "And it came to pass, when I, even I Daniel, had seen the vision, and sought for the meaning, then, behold, there stood before me as the appearance of a man. 16 And I heard a man’s voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision. 17 So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision. 18 Now as he was speaking with me, I was in a deep sleep on my face toward the ground: but he touched me, and set me upright. 19 And 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. 20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. 21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king. 22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power. 23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. 24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people. 25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand. 26 And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days. 27 And I Daniel fainted, and was sick certain days; afterward I rose up, and did the king’s business; and I was astonished at the vision, but none understood it."

1. Vs. 15-19: Daniel sees Gabriel the angel. Anther voice speaks and instructs Gabriel to explain the vision to Daniel.

2. Vs. 3-4, 20: Gabriel clearly and unmistakably identifies the ram as the Medo/Persian Empire. Some of the details are clearly explained. The meaning of the other elements can be ascertained by considering those that are clearly explained. See chart on Daniel 8 And The Two Kingdoms.

A. The ram’s two horns represent Media and Persia.

B. One of the two horns being higher than the other represents Persia as the dominant element in this coalition. See The Penguin Encyclopedia Of Ancient Civilizations, p. 148.

C. One horn coming up last represents the fact that, historically, the Persian Empire came to power after the Medes rose to power. Though the Medes appeared first, they were the lesser element in that empire. See The Penguin Encyclopedia Of Ancient Civilizations, pp. 147-148.

D. The Medo/Persian Empire advanced in all directions, conquering all nations around it. During its initial rise to power, no nation effectively resisted its advances.

3. Vs. 5-7, 21: Gabriel clearly identifies the male goat as the Grecian Empire. Again, some details are clearly explained, and some can be reasonably surmised from the balance of the vision.

A. The Greeks attacked Persia from the direction of their southern European home land. This would have been from Persia’s west.

B. The Greek conquest of the Persian Empire and the known world was remarkably fast. In terms of speed, it was unrivaled in this slower age. This speed of conquest is fitly represented by the goat moving along without touching the ground. See notes on Dan. 11:3-4.

C. This horn represents the first king of this conquering Grecian Empire. This, of course, was Alexander the Great.

D. The Greeks resoundingly defeated the Persians, leaving them powerless and taking total control of their empire.

4. Vs. 8, 22: The notable horn was broken. When Greece reached its zenith of conquest in about 323 BC, Alexander the Great died. His kingdom was left to the control of four of his generals. Each had control of a portion of the parent empire. These divisions were Thrace, Macedon, Syria (Selucids) and Egypt (Ptolemies). For greater detail, see notes on Dan. 11:3-4.

5. Vs. 9-12, 23-25: The little horn is identified as a king coming along in the latter time of the Grecian Empire. He is said to understand dark sentences, that is, riddles or enigmas. In other words, he will be extremely cleaver. This king would become great, going toward the south (Egypt), the east (Parthia), and the pleasant land (Palestine). This king would cast down some of the host (Jews, the holy people of verse 24) and the stars (various rulers, compare Isa. 13:10 and Isa. 14:4-15) and stomp them. And he would cause the daily sacrifice to cease and cast down the truth while prospering. He would achieve great political strength, but not by his own power. That is to say, he would gain power by trickery more than by force. As verse 25 says, by peace he would destroy many. Through his policy he would cause craft (trickery, deceit) to prosper for his own gain. He would even go so far as to resist the Lord, the Prince of princes. His demise would come, but he would not die at the hands of someone else, such as in battle. This can be none other than Antiochus Epiphanes of the Syrian (Seleucid) portion of the Grecian Empire. Note how he fulfilled these key facts of the description.

A. He came along in the latter time (about 175 BC) of the Grecian Empire. See Larned’s History Of The World, p. 248 and I Maccabees 1:1-10.

B. He was extremely cleaver, more so than many of his contemporaries. See notes on Dan. 11:21-45 for examples of his trickery.

C. He attacked toward the south (Egypt), the east (Parthians), and the pleasant land (Palestine). See Josephus Antiquities 12:5, 2-3, I Maccabees 1:16-23, II Maccabees 9:1-2 and Between The Testaments, p. 92.

D. He persecuted the Jews, and brought down various rulers. See Josephus Antiquities 12:5, 4 and Between The Testaments, p. 79.

E. He caused the daily sacrifice in the Jewish temple to cease. See I Maccabees 1:37-40 and Josephus Antiquities 12:5, 4.

F. He achieved great power by trickery more than by force. See Josephus Antiquities 12:5, 3-4. Also see notes on Dan. 11:21 for details about his rise to power.

G. He practiced trickery and deceit to a science. He was particularly notorious for this mode of operation. See I Maccabees 1:30 and Josephus Antiquities 12:5, 2.

H. He resisted the Lord, restricting worship of God. He set himself up as a god. See Josephus Antiquities 12:5, 4, Between The Testaments, pp. 79, 81 and II Maccabees 7:19.

I. His demise came, not at the hands of someone else, such as in battle. Instead, he died of a loathsome disease. See Josephus Antiquities 12:9, 2, I Maccabees 6:1-16 and II Maccabees 9:1-28 for accounts of his death.

6. Vs. 26: Calculating the 2300 day period is extremely difficult as history gives us approximate numbers of days, and not exact counting of time. There are three similar views worth mentioning regarding the proper way to reckon the time element of 2300 evenings and mornings. A brief explanation of these is as follows, indicating the preferred view.

A. One view holds that the 2300 evenings and mornings were actually only 1150 days. Since the evening makes one half of the day and the morning makes the other half, 2300 twelve hour periods should be understood as 1150 twenty-four hour periods. (Others maintain "evening and morning" is just a common Hebrew way of saying day. For example see Gen. 1:5, 8, 13, etc.) The counting of time would begin with the desecration of the temple and cessation of the daily sacrifice in 167 BC. Counting from that time forward to the cleansing of the temple in early 164 BC. This view maintains the 1290 days of Dan. 12:11 begins at the same point and ends 140 days after the cleansing of the temple with the death of Antiochus Epiphanes. The 1335 day period begins here also and lasts past the death of Antiochus another 45 days to a releasing of Jewish captives mentioned in Dan. 8:12-13. While this view does have some historical basis in the record of the Maccabees, it seems to conflict with the counting of Josephus. (Josephus says 3 to 3 ½ years passed from the desecration to the cleansing of the temple. See Antiquities 12:7, 6 and Wars 1:1, 1.) It also rests on a questionable interpretation of "evenings and mornings". The conventional understanding of 2300 days seems more likely. It is a plausible view, but these objections are sufficient to cast considerable doubt on its tenability. See chart on Daniel 8 And The Vision Of 2300 Days #1. See Gospel Meditations by Van Bonneau, p. 119.

B. Another view understands the phrase "evenings and mornings" to be a common Hebrew way of expressing a twenty-four hour period, citing the creation story noted above. This would mean the prophecy embraces 2300 days as opposed to 1150 days. Since Josephus reports the period of time the sacrifices ceased and the temple was desecrated as being 3 to 3 ½ years, or at the most 1260 days, the 2300 days cannot reasonably fit, being nearly twice the time history assigns to the period from the defiling of the temple to the cleansing of the temple. Thus, the time must be reckoned, not from the solemn statute that expressly prohibited the daily sacrifice, but from some significant event prior to that which lead up to the desecration of the temple and the end of daily sacrifice. This view cites Prideaux, Volume 3, p. 224-226 where he speaks of an assault by the Jews on an officer of Antiochus Epiphanes, namely Lysimachus. According to the dates we use here, this happened in 170 BC (171 BC according to Barnes) and would be the beginning of the 2300 day period. It is maintained this event represents the commencement of the hostilities which resulted in the ruin of the city and the closing of worship to God. Counting from that time forward to 164 BC, when the temple was purged, results in a period just over six years, which is close enough to satisfy the 2300 day period. Since there is no historical record that gives the exact counting of days between these events, arriving at a figure this close is satisfactory to support the view. While key elements of this view are well documented in history, it is not without its flaws. The primary flaw in this view is the starting point. There are so many events that lead up to the hostilities against the Jews that we can hardly point to the rebellion against Lysimachus as the one incident that triggered them. The view noted below starts before the defilement of the temple with a more concrete event, that being when Antiochus Epiphanes robbed the temple. Thus it is to be preferred over this view. See chart on Daniel 8 And The Vision Of 2300 Days #2. See Barnes’ Notes on Daniel, Volume II, pp. 114-117.

C. Another view, and the one we believe to be correct, holds the counting to begin, not with the desecration of the temple (167 BC), but with the robbing of the temple by Antiochus Epiphanes which took place two years earlier. (See notes on Dan. 11:28.) The end of the vision would extend, not to when the temple was purged (the idol removed and resuming of daily sacrifices) in 164 BC, but to the vindication (See above noted definition of "cleansed" in verse 14.) of the temple, or the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, its desecrater, in 163 BC. This span from 169 BC to 163 BC works out to just over six years, or close to our target of 2300 days. This view is consistent with the time frame assigned to these events by Josephus and is consistent with the accounts of the Maccabees as well as other history. It starts with a very tangible and significant event against the Jews and their temple, and ends, not with the mere restoration, but the vindication of the temple with the death of Antiochus Epiphanes. See chart on Daniel 8 And The Vision Of 2300 Days #3. Also see this chart for historical documentation.