The book of Daniel has been alternately placed within the Hebrew books of history as well as among the prophets. The truth is that this book is both historic as well as prophetic.

 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

There were three separate deportations of Judah to Babylon. The book of Daniel begins with the first of these deportations.

Nebuchadnezzar met and defeated the forces of Egypt at Carchemish in northern Syria in 606 B.C. It was an epic battle and changed the balance of world power for the next fifty years.

Moving southward, Nebuchadnezzar came to Jerusalem and took it after a short siege. It was during this time that Nebuchadnezzar received word from Babylon that his father had died. It was necessary for him to return home immediately lest some contender for the throne rise up in his absence. To make sure that the Jews would not revolt against him, he gave orders that hostages be taken from among the nobility of Judah. The criteria and purpose of these hostages is given in verses 3-4.

Nebuchadnezzar's plan for these hostages went far beyond mere intimidation. His plan was nothing less than the indoctrination of these young noblemen so that they would become good Babylonian citizens, faithful to his empire. Among these hostages was a young man named Daniel.

The book of Daniel goes on to deal with events taking place in Mesopotamia during the Babylonian Captivity. As such, it fills in the gap between the end of Kings and Chronicles and the beginning of Ezra.

1. Partially Written in Aramaic.

2. Emphasis on the Kingdom.

3. Emphasis on Prayer.

4. The Spiritual Battle.

Daniel 2:4 says, "Then the Chaldeans spoke to the king in Aramaic." From this point on to the end of chapter seven is written in Aramaic.

This section of Daniel begins and ends with visions and dreams that set forth a scheme of prophetic history.

Chapters 3 and 6 each give an account in which the reigning king mandated a form of worship that was unacceptable to the Jews.

• In both cases, the heroes of the narrative engaged in civil disobedience in order to remain faithful to the Lord.
• In both cases they were sentenced to death.
• In both cases there was a supernatural deliverance.

Chapters 4-5 also give parallel accounts.

• In both cases there is an example of unwarranted pride on the part of the Gentile ruler.
• In both cases, a supernatural message is sent that can only be interpreted by Daniel.
• In both cases, the fulfillment of the prophecy comes very soon after it is given.
• In both cases, the Gentile king to whom the prophecy is given suffers a grievous setback.

The city of Babylon now became the center of the ancient world. Not only was it the center of government, but it was the center of trade and culture as well.

1. Physical Description of the City.

2. The Defenses of the City.

3. The Hanging Gardens.

4. Temples.

Daniel 5 tells the story of Belshazzar, the last king of Babylon. The problem is that historical records tells us that Nabonidus was the last king of Babylon and that he was allowed to live on a pension following the Persian conquest of Babylon.

In 1854 Sir Henry Rawlinson found an inscription of Nabonidus in which his eldest son was mentioned, but no name was given. Records indicated that Nabonidus had given this son the power of regency while he traveled south to excavate in the ruins around Ur. More recent inscriptions have shown this son to be Belshazzar.

Babylonian records tell us that the city of Babylon fell to the Persians without a fight. Writing 150 years after the event, the Spartan General Xenophon tells a story of how the Persians dammed up and diverted the waters of the Euphrates River and then moved a small force up the exposed riverbed into the city to open the gates to the invaders.

Chapters 2 and 7 give a series of corresponding visions.

As the vision of chapter 7 opens, Daniel sees the four winds of heaven that are driving the sea. Remember that the word for "wind" and the word for "spirit" are the same. Daniel would be reminded of a time when the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters (Genesis 1:2). Now God is again moving the waters.

The four in the series is characterized by the number 10. There are ten toes in the image and there are 10 horns on the fourth beast. The number 10 goes back to the 10 commandments. It carried the idea of a number of completeness.

We have a tendency to read this and think of these kingdoms as being "on the earth" instead of "in the land."

Antiochus best fits this prophecy if we do not identify the fourth beast as Rome. This will especially be seen to be true when we compare chapter 7 with chapter 8. On the other hand, while we can see Antiochus as a pre-figure, it is in the days of Rome that Christ came to establish His kingdom.

There are several lessons that can be drawn from this chapter.

• Earthly power in and of itself degenerates into brutality. This is seen in the image of BEASTS that arise from the ocean.
• It is the tendency of brutality to increase. Each of these seems to be more terrible than the last.
• Restoration is an act of God, not of man. It is the Lord who in the end is seen to overcome these beasts.

Daniel 8 starts a new section of the book, yet there are interesting parallels to be seen between this chapter and the previous chapter.

There seems to be considerable overlap within these two visions, yet there are also some considerable differences.

• The vision in chapter 7 is given in chiastic parallel with that of chapter 2.
• The vision of chapter 8 is not so linked.

The vision of chapter 7 contains the description of animals that would have been unclean by Jewish standards. By contrast, the animals of chapter 8 are clean by the cultic standards of Jewish religion. These were the animals used in the rituals of Yom Kippur.

In order to further see the fulfillment, we need to know something of Jewish history as it took place between the Old and New Testament.

When Alexander the Great lay on his deathbed, his general gathered around and asked, "To whom do you bequeath your kingdom?" He replied, "To the strongest." With those words, he plunged his empire into civil war as each of his generals attempted to carve up a piece of the kingdom. After a hundred years of fighting, two main powers emerged from this.

• Ptolemy took Egypt
• Seleucus and his descendants eventually gained possession over Syria, Mesopotamia and Anatolia.

In 190 B.C. the Seleucid king Antiochus III lost the Battle of Magnesia to the Romans. His son, Antiochus IV, was sent as a hostage to Rome where he spent 12 years. Antiochus IV was treated well in Rome and sent to Latin schools where he roomed with a young Roman named Popilius. While he was here, he learned to respect the power and the endurance of the Romans.

Antiochus IV eventually escaped from Rome and returned to Syria so that, at the death of his father and his brother, he was able to take the throne for himself. He fancied himself as another Alexander and he set out on a mission of conquest.

He had heard that Egypt was making offers to Judah to turn against him, so he decided to make sure that his hold there remained undisturbed. In order to stabilize his position in Judah, he appointed men whom he could trust to positions of responsibility. One of these positions was that of high priest.

In doing this, he touched the Jews at their most sensitive spot � their religion. He created the very explosive situation that he had sought to avoid. Judah became a powder keg, waiting for a spark to set it off.

1. First Invasion of Egypt (170 B.C.).

2. First Revolt in Judah.

• Jews could not assemble for prayer.
• Observance of the Sabbath was forbidden.
• Possession of the Scriptures was illegal.
• Circumcision was illegal.
• It was illegal to refuse to eat hogs or any other food that was prohibited by the Mosaic Law.
• It was illegal not to participate in the monthly sacrifice honoring Antiochus. This involved eating of the meat that had been offered in sacrifice.

3. Second Invasion of Egypt (168 B.C.).

4. Second Revolt in Judah.

5. The Maccabean Revolt.

The parallels between the prophecies of Daniel 8 with the career of Antiochus Epiphanes are striking.

• He comes on the heels of the wars among Alexanders generals
• Magnifies itself against the Jews and against their God
• He puts a stop to the sacrificial system and makes alterations to the Law
• He attempts to overturn the truth of the Scriptures
• For a time he has power over the nation of Israel
• His sway over the Temple endures for approximately 3 and a half years (2300 mornings and evenings).
• Then the holy place is ultimately properly restored

I have to conclude that Antiochus did indeed fulfill these prophecies. On the other hand, Jesus indicated that there would come "an abomination of desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet" that would come in the future who would again stand in the holy place (Matthew 24:15). The implications of this are obvious. Jesus said that it would happen again.

It did. Within 40 years from the time that Jesus spoke these words, the Romans landed three legions in Palestine while a fourth marched up from Egypt. They converged upon Jerusalem and the city fell in August of A.D. 70. The Roman General Titus entered the Temple and burned it to the ground. It has never been rebuilt and to this day there remains upon the site an abomination that renders it desolate to Jewish worshipers.

Will there be a third fulfillment of this prophecy in the future? I don't believe that the Scriptures mandate such a fulfillment, but I would not presume to tell God what He can and cannot do. What we CAN do is to point out the fulfillments that have already taken place.

Daniel's prophecy of 70 weeks is made in the context of Daniel's prayer. Daniel was in captivity along with the rest of the Hebrew people. He had been pondering over the writings of the prophet Jeremiah and the promises of a 70 year captivity.

Daniel is careful to tell us when this prophecy took place. It was at the beginning of the Persian rule. The 70 years of captivity as promised by Jeremiah had come and gone.

You would think that Daniel would be rejoicing that the captivity was almost over. But instead, he goes to the Lord is fasting and in sackcloth and ashes. Instead of rejoicing, he presents a picture of mourning.

Why? Because he realizes that there is a missing element. The people of Israel have not repented and turned to the Lord.

Daniel understands the promise of the Old Covenant that restoration would take place only when the people repented. There was never a restoration promised apart from repentance. Instead there remains only a promise of further judgment.

As a result, the angel Gabriel comes to tell Daniel that there will be a lengthening of the time of judgment. Instead of being only 70 years in duration, it will now be over a period of seventy sevens.

The prophecy has to do with the restoration of the city of Jerusalem. It is a prophecy of the holy city and the most holy place. But that is not all. The scope of this prophecy transcends the mere rebuilding of Jerusalem when it speaks of:

• Finishing the transgression.
• Making an end of sin.
• Making atonement for iniquity.
• Bringing in everlasting righteousness.
• Sealing up vision and prophecy.

From our perspective, we can see that each of these aspects were ultimately fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ. By His death upon the cross, He finished transgression and made an end of sin and made atonement for iniquity. It is through that atonement that he brought in everlasting righteousness. As a result of this completed redemptive work, there is no further need for vision or for further prophecy as we have the completed Scriptures today.

All of these things are to take place within the scope of "seventy weeks" - literally, "seventy sevens." Just as Daniel had been reading of 70 years of captivity, so now he is told that 70 weeks remain.

This reckoning of time seems very foreign to us since we count time by tens, adding up either decades or centuries. The Jews, on the other hand, were Sabbath oriented. It is for this reason that they counted time by parts of seven. Every seven years they had a year-long holiday. Every 49th year all of their debts were forgiven.

Such groups of sevens is not unusual in the Scriptures. A similar wording is used in Leviticus 25:6 where seven weeks of years is said to refer to the 49 years between Jubilees. In Numbers 14:34, the Israelites were told that the 40 years they would spend in the Wilderness would correspond to the 40 days that the spies spent in the land of Canaan. Ezekiel was instructed to lie on his left side for 390 days and on his right side for 40 days. This was to be understood as a day for each year (Ezekiel 4:6).

I want to suggest that these 70 weeks are to be understood by each day of these "weeks" representing a single year. This means that we are dealing with a period of 70 weeks of year - a total of 490 years.

One interpretation of this decree views the seven weeks and the subsequent mention of the 62 weeks as not necessarily taking place concurrently. This would allow for Cyrus to be understood to be the one who gives the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem and for the High Priest to be the "anointed one" whose untimely death would signal the soon desecration of the Temple.

While this view does fit within the historical framework, I believe it is at best a type of the complete fulfillment that was to follow.

Sir Robert Anderson taught that this prophecy was to be reckoned in "prophetic years" of only 360 days, measured by twelve months of thirty days each. He used this complicated formula to add up an exact number of days from the final decree of Artaxerxes to the Triumphal Entry of Jesus in A.D. 33.

This is the view that has been traditionally adopted by Dispensationalists. It postulates a giant parenthesis between the 69th and 70th weeks into which the age of the church is to take place.

It seems evident that the theory is contrived, having been born out of a supposed necessity. There is no hint that we are to expect there to be a great gap or an intervening age between the 69th and 70th week. The Jews knew exactly how many days ought to be in a year and even added an "intercalary month" upon occasion to correct their calendar. Furthermore, it seems that Daniel himself understood the years of Jeremiah in the usual sense.

A third option best fits the facts of history as well as the demands of the prophecy. It is to see the decree as one given to Ezra in the 7th year of Artaxerxes. That Persian king began his reign in 464 B.C. This would place his decree to Ezra around 457 B.C. Later, in Ezra's priestly prayer, he alludes to possibly having been given permission, not only to build up the Temple, but also to build the walls of Judah and Jerusalem.

Nehemiah comes along twenty years later and goes into mourning when he hears that the walls still have not been repaired. But I would suggest that the decree which had been given earlier was the one described in Daniel's prophecy.

The culmination of the first 69 weeks is the advent of "Messiah the Prince." It is universally agreed among Christians that this Anointed Prince is a reference to Jesus. In hindsight, it is a simple matter for us to trace back to the four decrees to see which one of them aligned with the coming of Jesus.

It is evident from this chart that the first decree of Artaxerxes given to Ezra in 457 B.C. is the one that matches the prophecy of Daniel. The date of 27 A.D. is within the realm of the beginning of the ministry of Jesus. This view is presented in the following chart:

This view does not mandate any particular action that had to take place at the end of the 70th week. It DOES say that after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing (Daniel 9:26). This was fulfilled in Jesus going to the cross.

In verse 26 there is a second person introduced. He is described as "the prince who is to come." He stands in contrast to Messiah the Prince.

Notice the actions of this one who is "the prince who is to come." It is he who will destroy the city and the sanctuary. It must be remembered that, at the time Daniel received this prophecy, there was no city or sanctuary. It had been destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. But Daniel says that it is going to happen again.

This was dramatically fulfilled in A.D. 70 when the Roman General Titus marched against Jerusalem and took the city after a siege of eight months. Since that time, the site of the Temple has been the site of desolation and a complete destruction. Today archaeologists even debate as to exactly where the original Temple was located.

At first glance, verse 27 seems to be speaking of the same "prince who is to come" that was introduced in verse 26. Or is it? One is hard-pressed to find such a "firm covenant" that Titus made for a particular period, though it is noteworthy that the Jewish War lasted a total of seven years before all resistance was overcome. On the other hand, we can certainly say that Christ's death on the cross "made a firm covenant with the many" and that the rejection of His kingship is seen in the Scriptures as resulting in the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

Throughout Daniel 11 we are given an extensive prophecy that outlines the history of the kings of the north and the south and their interaction with Judah. This section spells out the history of the Ptolemies and the Seleucids who ruled from the death of Alexander the Great to the coming of Rome.

• He is described as one on whom the honor of kingship has not been conferred (11:21). The son of his older brother was actually in line for the throne, but Antiochus IV took it for himself.
• He captures one of the Ptolemies and makes an alliance with him with a view to placing him back on the throne of Egypt as a puppet king under his vassalage (11:23).
• He sets his heart against the holy covenant (11:29), coming to Jerusalem and insisting that a process of Hellenization be instituted.
• He finally comes against Egypt, only to find that the ships of Kittim (Rome) have come against him (11:30). He is disheartened and returns to Jerusalem to take out his anger and frustration upon the Jews.
• He desecrates the Temple: And forces from him will arise, desecrate the sanctuary fortress, and do away with the regular sacrifice. And they will set up the abomination of desolation. (Daniel 11:31).

(See Daniel 11 for a chart detailing the prophecy of Daniel 11 and its subsequent fulfillment in Ancient History)

With these words, Daniel seems to take us on a trip to the future as he pictures the final resurrection and judgment. This is introduced with the rise of a new prince. He is described as Michael, the great prince.

Some have suggested that Michael is another name for Jesus, the Son of God.

• He is the "great prince" (Daniel 12:1).
• His coming is a sign of the final judgment and the resurrection (Daniel 12:1-2).
• When Gabriel faced an insurmountable foe, it was Michael who was able to arrive and provide assistance (Daniel 10:13). He alone is able to stand up against those spiritual forces (Daniel 10:21).
• Michael is the one who is pictured in Revelation 12:7 as defeating Satan.

There are several problems with this identification:

• Michael is only one among a number of "chief princes" (Daniel 10:13).
• Michael is described in Jude 1:9 as an archangel. That passage goes on to say that Michael did not dare pronounce against him a railing judgment, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."
• There is no hint in any of these passages that we are to equate Michael with Jesus.

This stands in contrast to the instructions that would be given to the Apostle John at the close of the book of Revelation. John is told, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near" (Revelation 22:10). In Daniel's case, the fulfillment of the prophecy was a long way off. In the case of the book of Revelation, much of John's prophecy was at their very doorstep.