Why is the "desire of women" mentioned in Daniel 11:37? I. Text Of Daniel 11:37 “He will show no regard for the gods of his fathers or for the desire of women, nor will he show regard for any other god, for he will magnify himself above them all.” Ii. Literary And Historical Setting Daniel 11 is an angelic disclosure to Daniel (vv. 1–2) that surveys successive Near-Eastern empires and climaxes in a king who opposes God and His people. Conservative scholarship identifies vv. 21-35 with Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175-164 BC), while vv. 36-45 telescope through him to depict the final Antichrist (cf. 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4; Revelation 13:5-8). Dead Sea Scroll fragment 4QDana (c. 125 BC) contains Daniel 11 and matches the Masoretic reading verbatim, attesting textual stability. Iii. Hebrew Phrase Analysis ḥemdath nāšîm (“desire of women”): • ḥemdāh = “desirable, precious, delight” (Genesis 2:9; 1 Samuel 9:20). • nāšîm—plural, “women.” The construct may denote (1) an object women desire or (2) one who is desirable to women. Iv. Major Interpretive Options 1. Messianic Expectation In Second-Temple Judaism every faithful Jewish woman cherished being in Messiah’s lineage (Genesis 3:15; Isaiah 7:14; Micah 5:2). The Targum on Micah 4:8 calls Messiah “the Anointed One, the Desire of the Ages,” paralleling Haggai 2:7. Early church writers (Hippolytus, Jerome) and modern exegetes note that the Antichrist’s contempt for “the desire of women” signals hostility toward the promised Christ (cf. 1 John 2:18, 22). Strengths: coheres with the Christ-centered trajectory of Daniel; explains why the phrase is singular (“the desire”) and unique. 2. Natural Affection / Heterosexuality The text may highlight abnormal sexual ethics—either enforced celibacy or homosexual practice—consistent with the Antichrist’s self-exaltation (cf. Romans 1:26-27). The Hebrew lacks the preposition ל (“for”), so “he will not regard the desire of women” can mean he spurns ordinary marital desire (Genesis 2:24). Early Jewish historian Josephus records Antiochus IV’s debauched rites (Ant. 12.5.4) that suppressed normal family life. 3. Pagan Cult Object (Tammuz/Adonis) Ezek 8:14 describes women in the Temple “weeping for Tammuz,” a fertility deity annually “desired by women.” Akkadian tablets (BM 96273) call Dumuzi “beloved of the maidens.” Some scholars see a polemic: the king rejects both national gods and the popular female-centered cult of Tammuz/Ishtar. Archaeological digs at Nineveh (Burney Relief, c. 1800 BC) corroborate Near-Eastern goddess devotion. V. Comparative Jewish And Christian Exegesis • Qumran’s pesher on Daniel (4QpDan) interprets the king as a future “Man of Lie” nullifying covenantal hope—implicitly messianic. • Babylonian Talmud (Sanh. 98b) equates “Desire of Women” with Messiah ben-David. • Church Fathers (Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 5.25; Jerome, Comm. Daniel 11:37) adopt the messianic view. • Reformers such as Calvin see contempt for marriage itself, yet still connect the verse to the Antichrist. • Contemporary evangelical commentators (Archer, Walvoord, Wood) weigh the first two options, often concluding that both Christ-rejection and moral deviation characterize the king. Vi. Synthetic Assessment Scripture intertwines messianic anticipation and family integrity (Genesis 12:3; Psalm 127:3-5). Antichrist’s contempt therefore strikes at the twin institutions of redemption and creation. By rejecting “the gods of his fathers,” he breaks ethnic-religious continuity; by rejecting “the desire of women,” he assaults either the hope of bearing Messiah, the sanctity of marriage, or both; by exalting himself, he personifies Satanic self-worship (Isaiah 14:13-14). Vii. Prophetic Fulfillment Pattern Antiochus IV prefigured the eschatological Antichrist (type–antitype). His plundering of the temple (1 Macc 1:21-24) and outlawing of circumcision/marriage rites (1 Macc 1:62-63) show disregard for covenantal expectations linked to childbirth. Yet NT prophecy projects a final fulfillment (Matthew 24:15; 2 Thessalonians 2:4). Thus Daniel 11:37 is both historically grounded and forward-looking. Viii. Theological Implications 1. Christology: The phrase underscores Messiah’s uniqueness; denying Him is the apex of apostasy (Acts 4:12). 2. Anthropology: Attacking marriage and childbearing mirrors modern ideologies that decouple sex from procreation, fulfilling 1 Timothy 4:3 (“forbidding marriage”). 3. Eschatology: Believers should expect a global leader who desecrates worship, family, and morality before Christ’s triumphant return (Revelation 19:11-16). Ix. Praxis For The Church • Guard the gospel—the ultimate “desire” realized in Jesus’ incarnation (Luke 1:31). • Honor marriage and family as creational goods (Hebrews 13:4). • Discern counterfeit saviors; measure every claim against Scripture’s inerrant testimony (Isaiah 8:20). X. Conclusion “The desire of women” in Daniel 11:37 is a deliberately polyvalent phrase that captures the Antichrist’s contempt for (1) the long-awaited Messiah, (2) God-ordained marital desire, and (3) any competing deity. Each strand harmonizes with the total portrait of a blasphemous tyrant who exalts himself even as he foreshadows final judgment and the inevitable triumph of the risen Christ. |
    |