Chapter 8

1 Daniel’s vision of the ram and he goat. 13 The two thousand three hundred days of sacrifice. 15 Gabriel comforteth Daniel, and interpreteth the vision.

1. Third year. For a discussion of the reign of Belshazzar, see Additional Note on Chapter 5. Beginning with ch. 8 the writer reverts to the Hebrew language (see p. 749), which is used from here to the end of the book.

At the first. Doubtless a reference to the vision of ch. 7.

2. I was at Shushan. There has been considerable discussion as to whether the prophet Daniel was bodily present in Susa, or was present there only in vision. As far as the context is concerned, bodily presence need not be inferred. “I saw in a vision,” or simply “I saw in vision,” may be understood as introducing a series of events seen in vision with no necessary reference to actual presence. Other examples of such transportations taking place in vision, but not in actuality, are the “visit” of Ezekiel to Jerusalem (see on Eze. 8:3) and that of John to the wilderness (Rev. 17:3). We might mention also the experiences of Ellen G. White (see EW 32, 39). On the other hand, it cannot be proved that Daniel was not bodily in Susa at the time. It is not difficult to imagine that his travels, either on official business or otherwise, may at some time or another have taken him to the former metropolis of Elam. At the time of this vision, if we begin the 1st year of Belshazzar in 553, Elam was probably still a Babylonian province, though it went over to Cyrus at some time before he took Babylon. Josephus alleges that the prophet was actually in Susa at the time of the vision (Antiquities x. 11. 7).

Palace. Heb. birah, “citadel,” or “acropolis.” In the Hebrew the term is in apposition to Shushan. The phrase may be translated “in the citadel Shushan,” or, employing the form of the name more familiar in modern times, “Susa the capital” (RSV). According to the Greek historian Xenophon, Persian kings later used the city as a winter residence, and spent the rest of the year at Babylon or at Ecbatana. For further information regarding Susa see on Esther 1:2.

Ulai. Assyrian Ula, an unidentified river. Classical writers place Susa on the Eulaeus (Karun) or on the Choaspes (Kerkha). Some scholars see it as a canal between the Choaspes and Coprates rivers.

3. A ram which had two horns. The angel later identifies this symbol as representing the kings of Media and Persia (v. 20).

Higher than the other. Although it rose later than Media, Persia became the dominant power when Cyrus defeated Astyages of Media in 553 or 550. The Medes, however, were not treated as inferiors or as a subjugated people, but rather as confederates. See on ch. 2:39.

4. Pushing westward. Cyrus conquered Lydia in 547 b.c. and Babylon in 539. Cambyses extended the conquests south into Egypt and Nubia in 525. Darius Hystaspes went north against the Scythians in 513 (see Vol. III, pp. 54–59).

The Medo-Persian Empire covered much more territory than its predecessor, Babylon. So successful were Persian arms that in the days of Ahasuerus (Esther 1:1) the empire extended from India to Ethiopia, the eastern and southern extremities of the then-known world. A frequent title of the Persian monarch was “king of kings” or “king of the countries.”

Became great. Literally, “did great things,” “made himself big,” or “magnified himself” (RSV).

5. Goat. Identified by the angel as representing Greece (v. 21), that is, the Macedonian Empire of Alexander (see on ch. 7:6).

From the west. Greece lay west of the Persian Empire.

Touched not the ground. This description of great swiftness appropriately depicts the astonishing speed and completeness of Alexander’s conquests (see on ch. 7:6).

Notable horn. According to v. 21 (see also the parallel prophecy, ch. 11:3, 4), this notable horn represents the first great Grecian king, that is, Alexander the Great (see on ch. 7:6).

7. Moved with choler. Heb. marar, in the form here found, “to be enraged”. Choler is Old English for “anger.” The language of this verse depicts the completeness of the subjection of Persia to Alexander. The power of the empire was completely broken. The country was ravished, its armies cut in pieces and scattered, its cities plundered. The royal city of Persepolis, whose ruins still stand as a monument to its ancient splendor, was destroyed by fire.

8. Waxed very great. Or, “magnified himself exceedingly” (see on vs. 4, 9).

When he was strong. Prophecy predicted that Alexander would fall while his empire was at the height of its power. At the age of 32, still in the prime of life, the great leader died of a fever aggravated, no doubt, by his own intemperance. See on ch. 7:6.

Four notable ones. On the four Macedonian (or Hellenistic) kingdoms into which Alexander’s empire was divided, see on chs. 7:6; 11:3, 4.

9. Out of one of them. In the Hebrew this phrase presents confusion of gender. The word for “them,” hem, is masculine. This indicates that, grammatically, the antecedent is “winds” (v. 8) and not “horns,” since “winds” may be either masculine or feminine, but “horns,” only feminine. On the other hand the word for “one,” Хachath, is feminine, suggesting “horns” as the antecedent. ХAchath could, of course, refer back to the word for “winds,” which occurs most frequently in the feminine. But it is doubtful that the writer would assign two different genders to the same noun in such close contextual relationship. To reach grammatical agreement, either Хachath should be changed into a masculine, thus making the entire phrase refer clearly to “winds,” or the word for “them” should be changed into a feminine, in which case the reference would be ambiguous, since either “winds” or “horns” may be the antecedent. A number of Hebrew manuscripts have the word for “them” in the feminine. If these manuscripts reflect the correct reading, the passage is still ambiguous.

Commentators who interpret the “little horn” of v. 9 to refer to Rome have been at a loss to explain satisfactorily how Rome could be said to arise out of one of the divisions of Alexander’s empire. If “them” refers to “winds,” all difficulty vanishes. The passage then simply states that from one of the four points of the compass would come another power. Rome came from the west. In the literal explanation of the symbols of the vision Rome is said to arise “in the latter time of their kingdom” (v. 23), that is, the “kingdom” of the four horns. However, v. 23 refers only to the time when the little horn would arise and says nothing of the place of its rising, whereas v. 9 is concerned exclusively with its location.

It should be remembered that the prophet is here giving a running account of the prophetic symbolization, as the scenes were presented to him. He is not yet interpreting the vision. The interpretation of this feature of the vision occurs in v. 23. An important rule to follow when interpreting the symbols of visions is to assign an interpretation only to those features of pictorial representation that were intended to have interpretative value. As in parables, certain features are needed to complete the dramatic presentation, but are not necessarily significant of themselves. Which of these have interpretative value, Inspiration alone can determine. Seeing that in this instance Inspiration (v. 23) speaks only of the time when the power represented by this horn was to emerge, and says nothing as to its geographical point of origin, there is no reason for us to lay stress on the phrase, “out of one of them.”

Inasmuch as the vision of ch. 8 closely parallels the prophetic outlines of chs. 2 and 7, and inasmuch as in both of those outlines the power succeeding Greece is Rome (see on chs. 2:40; 7:7), the reasonable assumption here is that the “horn” power is of v. 8 also applies to Rome. This interpretation is confirmed by the fact that Rome precisely fulfilled the various specifications of the vision.

A little horn. This little horn represents Rome in both its phases, pagan and papal. Daniel saw Rome first in its pagan, imperial phase, warring against the Jewish people and the early Christians, and then in its papal phase, continuing down to our own day and into the future, warring against the true church. On this double application see on vs. 13, 23.

Exceeding. Heb. yether, basically meaning “remainder.” In a few instances it describes, as here, that which is above measure, in the sense of leaving a remainder. It is translated “excellency” (Gen. 49:3), “plentifully” (Ps 31:23), “much more abundant” (Isa. 56:12). The word translated “very” in Dan. 8:8 is meХod, the more common word for “exceedingly.” In the OT meХod is translated “exceeding” or “exceedingly” 22 times (Gen. 13:13; 15:1; etc.) in its simple form and 9 times in its repeated form. It cannot be argued that yether (Dan. 8:9) represents a greater degree thanmeХod. Any excelling greatness in Rome over that of Greece must be proved historically, not on the basis of these words.

Toward the south. Egypt was long an unofficial protectorate of Rome. Her fate was already in Rome’s hands in 168 b.c. when Antiochus Epiphanes, who was seeking to make war on the Ptolemies, was ordered out of the country. Egypt, still under the administration of its Ptolemaic rulers, was a pawn of Roman Eastern policy for many years before it became, in 30 b.c., a Roman province.

Toward the east. The Seleucid Empire lost its westernmost lands to Rome as early as 190 b.c., and finally became the Roman province of Syria in 65 b.c. or shortly thereafter.

Pleasant land. Heb. s\ebi, “ornament,” “decoration,” “glory.” Either Jerusalem or the land of Palestine is here referred to. S\ebi is translated “glorious” in ch. 11:16, 41. However, there the Hebrew has the word for “land,” whereas here “land” is understood. Palestine was incorporated into the Roman Empire in 63 b.c.

10. Host of heaven. Daniel is still describing what he saw in vision. Inasmuch as the angel later provides the interpretation (v. 24), we are not left in darkness concerning the significance of what is here described. The “host” and “stars” obviously represent “the mighty and the holy people” (v. 24).

Stamped upon them. This has reference to the fury with which Rome has persecuted the people of God so often throughout the centuries. In the days of the tyrants Nero, Decius, and Diocletian in pagan times, and again in papal times, Rome has never hesitated to deal harshly with those whom she chooses to condemn.

11. Prince of the host. Verse 25 speaks of this same power standing up against the Prince of princes. The reference is to Christ, who was crucified under the authority of Rome. See on chs. 9:25; 11:22.

By him. Heb. mimmennu, which may also be rendered “from him,” that is, from the “prince of the host.” The Hebrew of this passage presents certain difficult problems of translation. A very different reading is found in the Greek version of Theodotion. It reads as follows: “And [this shall be] until the chief captain shall have delivered the captivity: and by reason of him the sacrifice was disturbed, and he prospered; and the holy place shall be made desolate.” There is no way of determining to what extent, if any, this version reflects more perfectly the original text of Daniel. The Masoretic text as reflected by the KJV and RSV seems on the whole to be the more natural reading.

Daily sacrifice. Heb. tamid, a word occurring 103 times in the OT, used both adverbially and adjectivally. It means “continually” or “continual,” and is applied to various concepts, such as continual employment (Eze. 39:14), permanent sustenance (2 Sam. 9:7–13), continual sorrow (Ps. 38:17), continual hope (Ps. 71:14), continual provocation (Isa. 65:3), etc. It is used frequently in connection with the ritual of the sanctuary to describe various features of its regular services, such as the “continual bread” that was to be kept upon the table of shewbread (Num. 4:7), the lamp that was to burn continually (Ex. 27:20), the fire that was to be kept burning upon the altar (Lev. 6:13), the burnt offerings that were to be offered daily (Num. 28:3, 6), the incense that was to be offered morning and evening (Ex. 30:7, 8). The word itself does not mean “daily,” but simply “continual” or “regular.” Of the 103 occurrences it is translated “daily” only in Num. 4:16 and in the five occurrences of it in Daniel (chs. 8:11, 12, 13; 11:31; 12:11). The idea of “daily” was evidently derived, not from the word itself, but from that with which it was associated.

In ch. 8:11 tamid has the definite article and is therefore used adjectivally. Furthermore, it stands independently, without a substantive, and must either be understood subjectively as meaning “continuance” or be supplied with a substantive. In the Talmud, when tamid is used independently as here, the word consistently denotes the daily sacrifice. The translators of the KJV, who supplied the word “sacrifice,” obviously believed that the daily burnt offering was the subject of the prophecy.

As to the meaning of tamid in this passage three main views have been held:

1. That the “daily” refers exclusively to the sacrifices offered in the Temple in Jerusalem. Some expositors holding to this view apply the taking away of the “daily” to the interruption of the Temple service by Antiochus Epiphanes for a period of three years, 168–165 or 167–164 b.c. (see on ch. 11:14). Others apply it to the desolation of the Temple by the Romans in a.d. 70.

2. That the “daily” stands for “paganism,” in contrast with “the abomination that maketh desolate” (ch. 11:31), or the papacy; that both terms identify persecuting powers; that the word for “daily,” correctly meaning “continual,” refers to the long continuance of Satan’s opposition to the work of Christ through the medium of paganism; that the taking away of the daily and the setting up of “the abomination that maketh desolate” represents papal Rome replacing pagan Rome, and that this event is the same as that described in 2 Thess. 2:7 and Rev. 13:2.

3. That the term “daily”—“continual”—refers to the continual priestly ministry of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary (Heb. 7:25; 1 John 2:1) and to the true worship of Christ in the gospel age; that the taking away of the “daily” represents the substitution by the papacy of compulsory unity in a visible church in place of the voluntary unity of all believers in Christ, of the authority of a visible head—the pope—in place of that of Christ, the invisible head of the church, of a priestly hierarchy in place of direct access to Christ by all believers, of a system of salvation by works ordained by the church in place of salvation by faith in Christ, and, most particularly, of the confessional and the sacrifice of the mass in place of the mediatorial work of Christ as our great high priest in the courts of heaven; and that this system quite completely diverted men’s attention from Christ and thus deprived them of the benefits of His ministry.

Further, inasmuch as this third view maintains that the little horn is a symbol of imperial Rome as well as of papal Rome (see on vs. 9, 13), predictions concerning its activities may also be understood as applying to pagan Rome, as well as to papal Rome. Thus the “daily” may also refer to the earthly Temple and its services, and the taking away of the “daily” to the desolation of the Temple by Roman legions in a.d. 70 and the consequent cessation of the sacrificial services. It was this aspect of the activity of “the abomination of desolation” to which Christ referred in His delineation of future events (see on Dan. 11:31; cf. Matt. 24:15–20; Luke 21:20).

In comment on these three views it may be said that the Antiochus view must be ruled out for the reason that Antiochus does not fit the time periods or other specifications of the prophecy (see on Dan. 9:25).

Both the second and the third interpretations have been held by the various able expositors within the Advent Movement. Some devout Bible students have considered that the “daily” refers to paganism, and other equally devout Bible students, that the “daily” refers to the priestly ministry of our Lord. Perhaps this is one of the passages of Scripture on which we must wait until a better day for a final answer. As with other difficult passages of Scripture, our salvation is not dependent upon our understanding fully the meaning of Dan. 8:11.

On the historical development of the second and third views, see pp. 60–64.

Place. Heb. makon, “site.” Makon is used in the phrase “for the house of God to set it up in his place” (Ezra 2:68). The primary reference here may be to the destruction of Jerusalem (see Dan. 9:26).

12. Host. Heb. s\abaХ, generally meaning “host,” or “army,” and a few times meaning “service,” such as military or compulsory labor (see Job 7:1; 10:17; 14:14; Isa. 40:2). Interpreted as “host,” or “army,” the prediction may refer to the multitudes that fell under the influence of this power. The power would become mighty, “but not by his own power” (Dan. 8:24). See further on Dan. 10:1.

Cast down the truth. The papacy loaded the truth with tradition and obscured it by superstition.

13. How long? The question is tersely stated in the Hebrew, which reads literally, “How long the vision, the continual, the desolating transgression to give both sanctuary and host to trampling.”

Daily sacrifice. See on v. 11.

The transgression of desolation. This term covers both pagan and papal systems of false religion in conflict with the religion of God (see on vs. 9, 11).

Sanctuary. See on v. 14.

Host. See on v. 10.

14. Unto me. The LXX, Theodotion, and the Syriac read, “unto him.”

Days. Heb.Фereb boqer, literally, “evening morning,” an expression comparable with the description of the days of creation, “the evening and the morning were the first day” (Gen. 1:5), etc. The LXX has the word “days” following the expression “evening and morning.”

In an attempt to make this period roughly conform to the three years of the devastation of the Temple by Antiochus IV, some have ingeniously assigned to the expression “2300 evening morning” only 1150 literal days.

Concerning this, Keil has remarked that the prophetic period of the 2300 evening-mornings cannot be understood as “2300 half days or 1150 whole days, because evening and morning at creation constituted not the half but the whole day.” After quoting the foregoing statement, Edward Young says, “Hence, we must understand the phrase as meaning 2300 days” (The Prophecy of Daniel, p. 174).

Commentators have tried, but without success, to find some event in history that would fit a period of 2300 literal days. As Wright observes, “All efforts, however, to harmonise the period, whether expounded as 2300 days or as 1150 days, with any precise historical epoch mentioned in the Books of the Maccabees or in Josephus have proved futile. … Professor Driver is justified in stating, ‘It seems impossible to find two events separated by 2300 days (=6 years and 4 months) which would correspond with the description’” (Charles H. H. Wright, Daniel and His Prophecies, 1906, pp. 186, 187). The only way that consistency can be given to these “days” is to apply them in a prophetic sense by the application of the year-day principle.

The time here involved is specific and definite, but in ch. 8 no date is indicated for its beginning. However, in ch. 9 such a date is specifically mentioned (see on v. 25). This will be shown to be 457 b.c. From this date as a beginning, the 2300 prophetic days, designating as many solar years (see on ch. 7:25), reach to the year a.d. 1844. For a consideration of contextual evidence that ch. 9:24–27 provides an explanation of the vision of ch. 8:13, 14, and thus locates the starting point of the 2300 days or years, see on ch. 9:21. For comment on the validity of the date 457 b.c. see on ch. 9:25. For comment on a nonexistent LXX reading “2400” instead of 2300, formerly often cited but based on a misprint, see p. 58).

Sanctuary. Inasmuch as the 2300 years project us far into the Christian Era, the sanctuary cannot refer to the Temple at Jerusalem, which was destroyed in a.d. 70. The sanctuary of the new covenant is clearly the sanctuary in heaven, “which the Lord pitched, and not man” (Heb. 8:2; GC 411–417). Of this sanctuary Christ is the high priest (Heb. 8:1). John foresaw a time when special attention would be directed toward “the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein” (Rev. 11:1). The symbols employed by the revelator are strikingly similar to those employed in Dan. 8:11–13.

Be cleansed. From the Heb. s\adaq, “to be just,” “to be righteous.” The verb occurs in the form here found (niphal) only this once in the OT, which may suggest that a specialized meaning of the term is indicated. Lexicographers and translators suggest various meanings, such as “be put right,” or “be put in a rightful condition,” “be righted,” “be declared right,” “be justified,” “be vindicated.” The translation “shall be cleansed” is the reading of the LXX, which here has the verb form katharistheµsetai. It is not known whether the translators of the LXX gave an adapted meaning to the Heb. s\adaq or translated from manuscripts employing a different Hebrew word, perhaps t\ahar, the common Hebrew word for “to be clean,” “to cleanse.” The Vulgate has the form mundabitur, which also means “cleansed.” See on ch. 9:24.

As an aid to determining what event in connection with the heavenly sanctuary is here referred to, it is helpful to examine the services of the earthly sanctuary, for the priests in the earthly sanctuary served “unto the example and shadow of heavenly things” (Heb. 8:5). The services in the wilderness tabernacle and in the Temple consisted of two main divisions, the daily and the yearly. Christ’s daily ministration as our high priest was typified in the daily services. The annual Day of Atonement typified a work that Christ would undertake at the close of the age. For a detailed discussion of these two phases of service see on Lev. 1:16; see also GC 418–432. The prophecy of Dan. 8:14 announces the time for the beginning of this special work. The cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary comprehends the entire work of final judgment, beginning with the investigative phase and ending with the executive phase, which results in the permanent eradication of sin from the universe.

A significant feature of the final judgment is the vindication of God’s character before all the intelligences of the universe. The false charges that Satan has lodged against the government of God must be demonstrated as utterly groundless. God must be shown to have been entirely fair in the selection of certain individuals to make up His future kingdom, and in the barring of others from entrance there. The final acts of God will evoke from men the confessions, “Just and true are thy ways” (Rev. 15:3), “Thou art righteous, O Lord” (Rev. 16:5), and, “True and righteous are thy judgments” (Rev. 16:7). Satan himself will be led to acknowledge God’s justice (see GC 670, 671). The word translated “just” and “righteous” is dikaios, equivalent to the Heb. s\addiq, derived from s\adaq, a form of which is translated “shall be cleansed” in Dan. 8:14. Thus the Heb. s\adaq may convey the additional thought that God’s character will be fully vindicated as the climax to “the hour of his judgment” (Rev. 14:7), which began in 1844. See Problems in Bible Translation, pp. 174–177.

15. Sought for the meaning. Daniel did not understand the meaning of what he had seen. Many times the bearers of a prophetic message need to study that message themselves in order to discover its meaning (1 Peter 1:10–12). It is the duty of the prophet faithfully to relate what he has seen and heard (see Rev. 1:11).

16. Gabriel. In the OT the name Gabriel occurs only here and in ch. 9:21. The NT reports the appearance of this heavenly being to announce the birth of John the Baptist (Luke 1:11–20), again to announce to Mary the birth of the Messiah (Luke 1:26–33). The angelic visitor declared of himself, “I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God” (Luke 1:19). Gabriel occupies the position from which Satan fell (see DA 693; cf. DA 99). Gabriel was also the bearer of the prophetic messages to John (Rev. 1:1; cf. DA 99). See on Luke 1:19.

17. Time of the end. The vision reached until the time when the desolating power would be destroyed, an event associated with the coming of Jesus (2 Thess. 2:8).

The fact that the last events represented in the vision will be fulfilled at the end of this world’s history must be borne in mind when seeking an interpretation of the symbols of the vision. Any exposition that finds a complete fulfillment of the vision in an earlier period such as in the time of the Maccabees (see on Dan. 8:25) falls short of meeting fully the angel’s specifications, and must be considered erroneous and misleading.

19. End of the indignation. See on v. 17.

20. The ram. See on vs. 3, 4.

21. Rough. Heb. sЊaФir, “hairy,” or “shaggy.” SЃaФir is also used independently to describe a he-goat (Gen. 37:31; Lev. 4:23; etc.). On the interpretation see on Dan. 8:5.

Great horn. A symbol of Alexander the Great, the “first king” of the Greco-Macedonian world empire that was destined to replace the Persian Empire (see on vs. 5–8; ch. 7:6.

22. Four kingdoms. Compare v. 8; ch. 11:4. On the Hellenistic kingdoms that developed out of Alexander’s empire see on ch. 7:6. The accurate fulfillment of these features of the vision assures us that what follows will surely come to pass as predicted.

23. Latter time. That is, after the divisions of Alexander’s empire had existed for some time. The empire of Rome arose gradually, and attained supremacy only after the divisions of the Macedonian Empire had become weak. The prophecy applies to Rome in both its pagan and papal forms. There appears to be a blending of application, certain features applying to both, others more specifically to one or the other (see on ch. 8:11). That papal Rome was, for all practical purposes, the continuation of the Roman Empire is a well-established fact of history:

“Whatever Roman elements the barbarians and Arians left … were … put under the protection of the Bishop of Rome, who was the chief person there after the Emperor’s disappearance. … The Roman Church in this way privily pushed itself into the place of the Roman World-Empire, of which it is the actual continuation; the empire has not perished, but has only undergone a transformation. … That is no mere ‘clever remark,’ but the recognition of the true state of the matter historically, and the most appropriate and fruitful way of describing the character of this Church. It still governs the nations. … It is a political creation, and as imposing as a World-Empire, because the continuation of the Roman Empire. The Pope, who calls himself ‘King’ and ‘Pontifex Maximus,’ is Caesar’s successor”

(Adolf Harnack, What Is Christianity? [New York; G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1903], pp. 269, 270, italics in the original).

The transgressors. The Greek versions read “sins,” a translation that may be obtained from the Hebrew by a change in the Masoretic pointing.

Come to the full. There may be a reference here to various nations, or possibly specifically the Jews, filling up the cup of their iniquity (see Gen. 15:16; Ed 173–177).

Fierce countenance. Probably an allusion to Deut. 28:49–55.

Dark sentences. Heb. chidoth, “enigmatic statements,” as in Num. 12:8, “riddles,” as in Judges 14:12; Eze. 17:2, or “perplexing questions,” as in 1 Kings 10:1. Some believe the meaning here is “ambiguous speech,” or “double dealing.”

Stand up. That is, to assume power.

24. Not by his own power. Compare, “an host was given him” (v. 12). Some see a reference here to the fact that the papacy reduced the civil power to subservience and caused the sword of the state to be wielded on behalf of its religious objectives.

Destroy wonderfully. Better, “cause frightful destruction.” This power persecuted even unto death those who opposed its blasphemous claims, and would have extinguished “the holy people” had not the Lord intervened on their behalf.

25. Craft. Better, “deceit.” The methods of this power are the perfection of subtlety and deceit.

By peace. Better, “while they live at ease,” that is, while many feel they are living in security they will be destroyed unawares.

Prince of princes. Evidently the same being designated “the prince of the host” in v. 11, none other than Christ. It was a Roman governor who sentenced Christ to death. Roman hands nailed Him to the cross, and a Roman spear pierced His side.

Without hand. This implies that the Lord Himself will eventually destroy this power (see ch. 2:34). The ecclesiastical system represented by this power will continue until destroyed without human hands at the second coming of Christ (see 2 Thess. 2:8).

A number of commentators have set forth the view that the “little horn” power of ch. 8 symbolizes the career of Antiochus Epiphanes (see on ch. 11:14). However, a careful examination of the prophecy makes evident the incompleteness with which this persecuting Seleucid king fulfilled the specifications set forth. The four horns of the goat (ch. 8:8) were kingdoms (v. 22), and it is natural to expect the little horn to be a kingdom also. But Antiochus was only one king of the Seleucid empire, hence was a part of one horn. Therefore he could not be another complete horn. Further, this horn grew great toward the south, the east, and the pleasant land of Palestine (v. 9). Antiochus’ advance into Egypt ended in humiliation from the Romans, his successes in Palestine were short-lived, and his push to the east was cut short by his death. His policy of enforced Hellenism utterly failed, nor did his craft bring him outstanding prosperity (v. 12).

Furthermore, Antiochus did not come at the latter end (v. 23), but about the middle of the period of the divided Hellenistic kingdoms; his might could hardly be attributed to anything but his own power (v. 22); his craft and policy failed more than they prospered (v. 25); he did not stand up against any Jewish “Prince of princes” (v. 25); his casting of the truth to the ground (v. 12) was temporary and completely unsuccessful, for it drove the Jews to the defense of their faith against Hellenism. Even though he spoke proud words, oppressed the people of God, and briefly desecrated the Temple, and though some other points might be argued for as partly true of his activities, nevertheless the inadequacy of Antiochus as a fulfillment of many specifications of the prophecy is obvious. See further on v. 14; chs. 9:25; 11:31.

26. Evening and the morning. A clear reference to the time prophecy of v. 14 (see comments there). At the present the angel does not enlarge upon the 2300-day vision but merely emphasizes its truthfulness.

Shut thou up. Compare similar instructions recorded in ch. 12:4 (see comments there).

For many days. The fulfillment of the various details of the vision of this chapter would extend into the distant future.

27. I Daniel fainted. Daniel was doubtless deeply concerned about the events that had been revealed to him. Instead of predicting an immediate end to the indignation, Gabriel informed the prophet that the ultimate end would be many years in the future.

None understood it. Further information was given later (see on ch. 9:23).

Ellen G. White comments

1–27PK 548, 553, 554

12 EW 74

13, 14 PK 554

14 Ev 223; EW 42, 54, 63, 243, 250, 253; GC 326, 328, 352, 399, 409, 417, 424, 426, 457, 486; LS 58, 63, 278; SR 369, 375, 377; 1T 52, 58

16 DA 234

26, 27 PK 554

27 GC 325