Does the “abomination of desolation” in Daniel 11:31 conflict with similar references in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14, suggesting multiple or differing events? Historical and Textual Overview Daniel 11:31 contains a prophetic statement: “They will set up the abomination that causes desolation”. Centuries later, Matthew 24:15 records Jesus saying, “When you see standing in the holy place the abomination of desolation…”, and Mark 13:14 presents a parallel warning. At first glance, some readers suggest these refer to different or even conflicting events. However, when we examine the historical context, the immediate fulfillment described in Daniel, and the future implications drawn by Jesus in Matthew and Mark, it becomes apparent that these passages can harmonize rather than conflict. Below is an exhaustive examination of Daniel’s prophecy and the New Testament references, addressing concerns about multiple fulfillments or contradictory predictions. 1. Prophetic Background in Daniel Daniel 11:31 speaks of a time when a power hostile to God’s people would erect “the abomination that causes desolation.” Historically, this points strongly to the actions of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (2nd century BC), who desecrated the Temple by sacrificing unclean animals on the altar, outlawing Jewish practices, and erecting idolatrous statues. However, within Daniel’s broader eschatological framework, prophecy often reflects a near-far fulfillment pattern. Ancient records—like those included in 1 Maccabees and corroborated by sources such as Josephus (Jewish Antiquities, Book 12)—substantiate the desecration under Antiochus and underscore a literal near-term event fulfilling Daniel’s words. Yet Daniel’s visions in chapters 9, 11, and 12 also set the stage for an ultimate “time of the end,” indicating that more than one stage of fulfillment may be in view. This concept of a prophecy having both immediate and future components is consistent with how other biblical prophecies function (e.g., Isaiah 7:14 referencing both a sign in Isaiah’s time and a sign pointing to the birth of Christ). 2. New Testament Context and Jesus’ Teaching In Matthew 24:15, Jesus references “the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel,” and Mark 13:14 likewise admonishes readers to recognize it. Jesus’ words were given in the context of His teaching on coming judgment and future tribulation. • Context of 70 AD Destruction: Many scholars agree that Jesus’ reference pointed, at least in part, to the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 by the Romans, when the Temple was destroyed. Historians like Josephus (The Jewish War, Book 6) noted that the Roman occupation brought sacrilegious symbols into the Temple precincts, which some have regarded as a form of “abomination.” This event, therefore, corresponds with Jesus’ warning, as the holy place was indeed left desolate. • Future Fulfillment Possibility: Others contend that Jesus’ words still project forward to a greater tribulation, aligning with the far end of Daniel’s prophecy (Daniel 12:1–3). In this view, Daniel 11:31 can foreshadow events of the Maccabean era and AD 70, yet also point to a culminating scenario in a future end-time context. Thus, there are strong grounds to read Jesus’ statements in Matthew and Mark as an echo of Daniel’s prophecy, without implying any conflict. Rather, they highlight a recurring pattern: a desecration that happened, that would happen again in AD 70, and that still may foreshadow a final scenario at the climax of history. 3. Harmonizing the Events Some interpreters see a singular fulfillment, but many conservative scholars discern a multiple-fulfillment model: 1. Historical Fulfillment with Antiochus IV (Daniel 11:31) The immediate fulfillment came under Antiochus IV, as recorded in Jewish texts and corroborated by archaeological findings pertaining to Hellenistic influences in Judea. 2. Destruction of the Second Temple (Matthew 24:15 / Mark 13:14) A second fulfillment occurred in AD 70 when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem’s Temple. Elements of sacrilege included the emblem of the Roman legions brought into the Temple area. 3. Possible Future Culmination Passages in Daniel 9 and 12 reference a final time of unprecedented tribulation. Jesus’ warnings in Matthew 24 and Mark 13 blend descriptions that apply to AD 70 yet also appear to describe still future events. This prophetic layering is common to biblical prophecy—an immediate historical reference that also points to ultimate fulfillment. Each event, though distinct, is woven together under the unifying theme of “abomination of desolation.” Rather than signifying conflicting predictions, multiple culminations of a recurring pattern fit Daniel’s long-range view of history and Jesus’ horizon of future tribulation. 4. Scriptural Consistency and Evidence • Dead Sea Scrolls: Portions of Daniel found among the Dead Sea Scrolls (e.g., 4QDanc) predate the Maccabean period and confirm that Daniel’s text was established well before Antiochus’ desecration, supporting predictive prophecy rather than mere historical record. • Jewish Writings and Historical Sources: 1 Maccabees 1:54 and Josephus provide independent accounts of the Temple desecrations, reinforcing that Daniel’s language accurately prophesied Antiochus’ abominations. • Gospel Manuscript Evidence: The reliability of Matthew’s and Mark’s recorded words is further upheld by the thousands of Greek manuscripts and the attestations in patristic writings, preserving the authenticity of Jesus’ statements. Through these documents and archaeological insights, the biblical narrative’s consistency emerges, establishing that multiple occurrences of sacrilege do not undermine but rather illustrate the continuing pattern Daniel foresaw and Jesus reiterated. 5. Addressing the Alleged Conflict The question arises: “If Daniel 11:31 was fulfilled by Antiochus, and Jesus later refers to it, does it mean there are multiple abominations?” The short answer is that the biblical writers present different points along the same thematic storyline: desecration of the holy place as a recurring motif through history. Rather than posing a conflict, these separate incidents reflect the pattern of fulfillment—a near term (Daniel’s immediate horizon of Antiochus) and further applications (Jesus’ prediction regarding the Temple in AD 70), intersecting with eschatological language that points to a culminating event. This is not contradictory but highlights God’s revealing of repeated cycles of opposition, culminating in final resolution. 6. Practical Implications for Understanding Prophecy • Encouragement to Study Context: The fact that Daniel’s prophecy can be fulfilled at more than one point emphasizes the need to compare Scripture with Scripture. • Recognition of Recurring Patterns: Prophecy often functions typologically, meaning earlier events foreshadow later occurrences. • Confidence in God’s Sovereignty: Despite the horror of abominations, history and Scripture affirm that each stage is within God’s foreknowledge, weaving a unified storyline of redemption and final deliverance. Conclusion When examining Daniel 11:31 alongside Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14, it becomes clear that the references harmonize through a pattern of repeated events. Daniel’s prophecy finds one specific historical fulfillment under Antiochus IV, and Jesus uses that historical precedent to foretell a coming desecration—seen in the destruction of the Second Temple in AD 70—while also pointing further ahead to a future culmination in redemptive history. No genuine conflict arises between these passages. When viewed through the lens of near-far fulfillment and the progressive unfolding of biblical prophecy, they present a composite picture of how human rebellion against God takes shape over time, yet cannot thwart His overarching plan. Each scriptural reference converges around the same conceptual “abomination,” illustrating that God’s Word consistently depicts cycles of desecration that foreshadow an ultimate confrontation and final victory. |
    |