How does Daniel 11:29 fit into the broader prophecy of Daniel 11? Text “At the appointed time he will return and go toward the south, but this time will not be like the first.” — Daniel 11:29 Overview of Daniel 11 Daniel 11 is a tightly-choreographed panorama of history, telescoping from the Persian era (v. 2) through Alexander the Great (v. 3-4), the long Seleucid–Ptolemaic struggles (v. 5-20), the rise and fall of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (v. 21-35), and finally a yet-future world ruler who prefigures the Antichrist (v. 36-45; cf. 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4; Revelation 13). Verse 29 stands at the hinge of the Antiochus section, marking the moment his fortunes reverse and setting the stage for the abomination of desolation (v. 31). Literary Placement 1. Persians and Greeks (v. 2-4) 2. North–South Wars (v. 5-20) 3. Antiochus IV’s Rise (v. 21-28) 4. Antiochus IV’s Second Egyptian Campaign—v. 29 (pivot) 5. Roman Intervention & Persecution (v. 30-35) 6. Final King (Antichrist) (v. 36-45) Historical Background to v. 29 • Antiochus IV Epiphanes (“the king of the North,” Seleucid) first invaded Egypt in 170 BC and forced the Ptolemaic throne into submission (v. 25-27). • Two years later, “at the appointed time,” he launched a second campaign (168 BC). Livy (45.11-12) records Rome’s envoy, Gaius Popilius Laenas, confronting him at Eleusis, drawing a circle in the sand and demanding immediate withdrawal. Humiliated, Antiochus turned north—“this time will not be like the first.” Key Words Explained • “Appointed time” (Heb. מוֹעֵד, moed) signals divine scheduling (cf. Daniel 8:19; 12:9). God—not earthly kings—sets the boundaries. • “Return” (שׁוּב, shuv) echoes v. 28, creating a deliberate contrast between the triumph of the first incursion and the forced retreat of the second. Correlation with Secular Sources Polybius, Histories 29.27; 31.1 confirms Antiochus’s abrupt withdrawal. 1 Maccabees 1:20-24 parallels Daniel’s account, adding temple plunder once he reached Jerusalem. Papyrus Louvre 192 (dated 166 BC) references the Seleucid fiscal crisis that followed—demonstrating a measurable economic downturn “not … like the first.” Connection to v. 30 (“ships of Kittim”) Verse 30 explains why the second expedition failed: Roman warships (“Kittim,” cf. Numbers 24:24; Qumran War Scroll 1QM 15.1-3) intercepted Antiochus at Alexandria. The prophecy pairs v. 29 and v. 30 as cause and effect—one verse hints at the reversal, the next specifies the agent. Theological Implications 1. Sovereignty: God appoints times (Isaiah 46:10; Acts 17:26). Even a pagan despot’s itinerary bends to Yahweh’s calendar. 2. Providence: The humiliating setback catalyzed Antiochus’s rage against the Jewish people (Daniel 11:30-31), fulfilling further prophecy and preparing typology for the end-time Antichrist (v. 36-45). 3. Encouragement to the faithful remnant (v. 32-35): History’s turning points are orchestrated for God’s redemptive objectives. Answer to Critical Late-Dating Objection Skeptics claim Daniel was penned c. 165 BC. Yet: 1. Qumran copies show Daniel treated as canonical alongside Isaiah and Ezekiel, implying earlier composition. 2. Linguistic data reveal a mix of Imperial Aramaic and early Hebrew forms predating 165 BC. 3. The prophecy extends accurately beyond Antiochus into still-future material (v. 36-45)—which a Maccabean redactor could not have verified. Prophetic Continuity Toward the End of the Age The dramatic shift in v. 29 images what Jesus cites in Matthew 24:15 concerning the abomination of desolation, bridging Antiochus’s historical persecution to an ultimate eschatological fulfillment. Thus v. 29 is both a historical marker and a prophetic template. Practical Application Believers facing reversals can trust the “appointed times” of God. Persecution (v. 32-35) refines, instructs, and magnifies divine glory—echoed in 1 Peter 1:6-7. Summary Daniel 11:29 is the narrative hinge in which Antiochus IV’s fortunes turn. It fits the broader prophecy by: • Marking the divinely fixed moment of change, • Bridging earlier victories to subsequent humiliation, • Introducing Roman intervention and setting up the desecration of the temple, • Providing a typological link to the ultimate Antichrist, • Showcasing predictive detail confirmed by extra-biblical history and securely transmitted manuscripts, and • Demonstrating God’s sovereign orchestration of world events for redemptive ends. |
    |