Does Daniel make a historical error in Daniel 11:36-45 with regard to Antiochus Epiphanes as critics claim?
Question:
I have a friend who believes that Daniel 11 gets Antiochus’ death incorrect. Is this true? I tend to believe he is wrong however I don’t know the history all that well. Here is what he gave me http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_11 The second paragraph speaks about details of his death and how they do no match up with what Daniel predicted.
Jason;
This author does not correctly understand the prophecy in Daniel 11. Actually, he makes the same error that many or most make with regard to Daniel 11. Have you read my book on Daniel? You ought to, as I give a rather careful description of what is going on in Daniel 11:36-45. As the author you refer to says, Daniel 11:1-35 if a beautiful and accurate description/prophecy of the events in the wars between the Ptolemaic and Seleucid dynasties. However, he is incorrect in assuming that 11:36-45 is an inaccurate description of the later career of Antiochus Epiphanes. This section is a prophecy of the eventual destruction of the Greek Ptolemaic kingdom by Rome. This collision occurred in 33BC in a series of events which culminated in the Battle of Actium. In this battle between the Ptolemaic Cleopatra and Rome (which was a proxy war between Marc Antony and Octavius), God finally brought to judgment the Greek empires. There is much detail in the prophecy which is consistent with Rome and with the historic details of the result of the destruction of the Ptolemies, including the capture of Libya and Ethiopia (and quite notably not of Arabia) by Octavius. Like Daniel says, "At the time of the end (of the Greek power), the King of the South (the Ptolemies in Daniel 11) will engage him (Rome) in battle. Daniel describes a battle at sea and on the land, which is also consistent with the campaign which culminated in the sea battle of Actium. This is a wonderful confirmation of the prophetic power of Daniel. Not only that, but it is a prophecy fulfilled after 164 BC which makes the theory that this book is a pseudepigraphic pretend prophecy looking back on events which have alread occurred untenable. Daniel was always right, and he was right in both the big picture and the smallest details. I am not sure if I am a "fundamentalist" (see his comments), but I can say with confidence that Daniel 11:36-45 is a prophecy of the destruction of the Greek powers by Rome under Octavius/Augustus.
John Oakes, PhD
