VIII. The Rise of Antiochus Epiphanes, 11:21-12:1
“In his place (Seleucus IV) a despicable person will arise;( Antiochus IV) royal honors will not be given to him, (The nation would not, by popular consent, confer the kingdom on him as was customary,) but he will come in a time of peace (At a time when Syria was not at war) and seize the kingdom by intrigue. (In other words, this despicable person would seize the kingdom though it did not rightly belong to him.) Then a flood of forces will be swept away before him and destroyed, along with a prince of the covenant. After an alliance is made with him, he will act deceitfully; for he will rise to power with only a few people.” (NAS)
A. Antiochus Epiphanes would indeed obtain the kingdom by intrigue in 175 BC, just as verse 21 says.
The right of succession actually belonged to Demetrius I, the son of Seleucus IV, and nephew of Antiochus. According to Hans Volkmann, Professor of Ancient History at the University of Cologne, “After his [Seleucus IV] was defeated by the Romans in 190–189 BC, Antiochus IV served as a hostage for his father in Rome from 189 to 175 BC. [While in Rome, Antiochus] learned to admire Roman institutions and policies. Seleucus IV, was later able to exchange Demetrius for [Antiochus].”
Heliodorus, the man whom Seleucus had sent to collect taxes, murdered Seleucus and usurped the throne. Antiochus later overthrow him while Demetrius was still being held in Rome. Antiochus quickly made alliances with Eumenes, the king of Pergamus, as well as with Rome and others and secured their assistance in overthrowing Heliodorus. Thus, “he will come in a time of peace and seize the kingdom by intrigue.”
B. He would also destroy all who posed any threat to him seizing the throne.
Benson
[The flood of forces] “is to be understood as the forces of Attalus and Eumenes, who favored Antiochus: [with this much force behind him], his competitors for the crown, were all “swept away before him and destroyed.” (namely, Heliodorus, as well Ptolemy VI who had his own plans for Syria,)
C. He would also displace the rightful high priest. “Along with a prince of the covenant. After an alliance is made with him, he will act deceitfully;” 23 (NAS)
“As soon as Antiochus was seated on his throne, he removed Onias as the high priest, and [gave] Jason, Onias’ brother, [the office of high priest. All of this was done solely for] the…three hundred and sixty talents of silver ($7,095,330) Jason had offered for the office of high priest. Onias, [who by all accounts, was a good high priest], was not only displaced for a wicked usurper, he…was later murdered by the king’s deputy.”
“After an alliance is made with him, he will act deceitfully.” Jason was also later replaced for the same motives – money. Jason’s brother, Menelaus offered Antiochus three hundred talents more than he had received from Jason, (appx. $13,000,000) So, Antiochus sold the office of high priest to Menelaus.
D. Antiochus’ rise to power
1. Verse 24 says, “For he will rise to power with only a few people. In a time of tranquility, he will enter the richest parts of the realm, and he will accomplish what his fathers never did, nor his ancestors;”
From Barnes Notes
“The meaning of this seems to be, that at first, his own forces would be small, and that he would go up in such a way as not to excite suspicion. [He later increased] his forces, [and] united himself [with his] confederates and lured the people by the promise of rewards. By gradually taking one town after another and adding them to his dominions, he became strong.” Thus, he “seized the kingdom by intrigue.”
2. Verse 24 says, “He shall disperse among them the plunder, spoil, and riches; and he shall devise his plans against the strongholds, but only for a time.”
Antiochus was an artist at securing allegiance through the redistribution of wealth. In order to gain as much acceptance as possible among both the people and those of power and influence, Antiochus would lavish his plunder upon them. These displays of generosity were matters of public spectacle. It would seem that money and riches were important to Antiochus only as a means to an end. 1 Maccabees, 3:30 tells us that in his liberality, and in the giving of gifts, he had surpassed all the kings who had preceded him. Polybius records that when Antiochus would meet “accidentally with people whom he had never seen before, he would enrich them with unexpected presents; and sometimes, standing in the public streets, he would throw money, and cry aloud, ‘Let him take it to whom fortune shall give it.’” (Benson)
3. “And he will devise his schemes against strongholds, but only for a time.”
a. In other words, he would plot against Egypt and develop strategies for taking control of the southern kingdom.
b. “But only for a time” because, his plans for Egyptian conquest would be thwarted by Rome.
IX. Antiochus’ Campaign Against Egypt in 25-28.
“And with a large army he will stir up his power and his courage against the king of the South, (Ptolemy VI) who will mobilize a very large and powerful army but will not withstand the plots devised against him. Those who eat from his provisions will seek to destroy him; his army will be swept away, and many will fall slain.”
“And the two kings, with their hearts bent on evil, will speak lies at the same table, but to no avail, for still the end will come at the appointed time. (The time appointed by the Almighty.) The king of the North will return to his land with great wealth, but his heart will be set against the holy covenant; so, he will do damage and return to his own land.”
“At the appointed time he will invade the South again, but this time will not be like the first. Ships of Kittim will come against him, and he will lose heart.”
A. Antiochus mobilizes against Egypt.
Barnes Notes
What Antiochus accomplished that all of his predecessors had failed to accomplish was that he took “complete control of Egypt. The wars of his predecessors with the Egyptians had been mostly waged in Coelo-Syria and Palestine, for the possession of those provinces. Antiochus, however, first took Pelusium, the key of Egypt, and then invaded Egypt itself, [and] seized upon its strongest places, and made the king a captive.”
Part of the reason for this mobilization against Egypt was a dispute over Coelo-Syria. Benson tells us that “Ptolemy demanded Antiochus surrender Coelo-Syria to him [which he felt belonged to him by] virtue of the marriage articles between Ptolemy V and Cleopatra I. But instead of complying with Ptolemy’s demand, Antiochus invaded Egypt with a vast force by both land and by sea.”
In response, Ptolemy dispatched strong forces to stop Antiochus and the two armies first met in battle between Pelusium and mount Cassius. Although Antiochus defeated the armies of Egypt, he still did not yet gain possession of Pelusium.
“In his next campaign, [Antiochus] would have greater success. He routed the Egyptians and took Pelusium, then ascended as far as Memphis, and made himself master of all Egypt.” 1 Maccabees 1:17-19 says, “Wherefore, he entered Egypt with a great multitude, with chariots, and elephants, and horsemen, and a great navy.”
Volkmann says that “in 169 BC, [Antiochus] occupied Egypt with the exception of the capitol city of Alexandria.”
B. Verse 26 says that Ptolemy's own people would also scheme against him. "…those who eat of the portion of his delicacies shall destroy him; his army shall be swept away, and many shall fall down slain.”
Volkmann says that “the misfortunes of Ptolemy were ascribed to the treachery and baseness of his own ministers and subjects. Ptolemy Macron, who was governor of Cyprus, [also] revolted [against] Ptolemy VI and delivered up [Cyprus] to Antiochus. [Even] the Alexandrians, seeing the weakness of Ptolemy VI renounced their allegiance to him and proclaimed his younger brother [Physcon] as king instead.” (The word means “fatty.” He is otherwise called Ptolemy VIII).
“In his place (Seleucus IV) a despicable person will arise;( Antiochus IV) royal honors will not be given to him, (The nation would not, by popular consent, confer the kingdom on him as was customary,) but he will come in a time of peace (At a time when Syria was not at war) and seize the kingdom by intrigue. (In other words, this despicable person would seize the kingdom though it did not rightly belong to him.) Then a flood of forces will be swept away before him and destroyed, along with a prince of the covenant. After an alliance is made with him, he will act deceitfully; for he will rise to power with only a few people.” (NAS)
A. Antiochus Epiphanes would indeed obtain the kingdom by intrigue in 175 BC, just as verse 21 says.
The right of succession actually belonged to Demetrius I, the son of Seleucus IV, and nephew of Antiochus. According to Hans Volkmann, Professor of Ancient History at the University of Cologne, “After his [Seleucus IV] was defeated by the Romans in 190–189 BC, Antiochus IV served as a hostage for his father in Rome from 189 to 175 BC. [While in Rome, Antiochus] learned to admire Roman institutions and policies. Seleucus IV, was later able to exchange Demetrius for [Antiochus].”
Heliodorus, the man whom Seleucus had sent to collect taxes, murdered Seleucus and usurped the throne. Antiochus later overthrow him while Demetrius was still being held in Rome. Antiochus quickly made alliances with Eumenes, the king of Pergamus, as well as with Rome and others and secured their assistance in overthrowing Heliodorus. Thus, “he will come in a time of peace and seize the kingdom by intrigue.”
B. He would also destroy all who posed any threat to him seizing the throne.
Benson
[The flood of forces] “is to be understood as the forces of Attalus and Eumenes, who favored Antiochus: [with this much force behind him], his competitors for the crown, were all “swept away before him and destroyed.” (namely, Heliodorus, as well Ptolemy VI who had his own plans for Syria,)
C. He would also displace the rightful high priest. “Along with a prince of the covenant. After an alliance is made with him, he will act deceitfully;” 23 (NAS)
“As soon as Antiochus was seated on his throne, he removed Onias as the high priest, and [gave] Jason, Onias’ brother, [the office of high priest. All of this was done solely for] the…three hundred and sixty talents of silver ($7,095,330) Jason had offered for the office of high priest. Onias, [who by all accounts, was a good high priest], was not only displaced for a wicked usurper, he…was later murdered by the king’s deputy.”
“After an alliance is made with him, he will act deceitfully.” Jason was also later replaced for the same motives – money. Jason’s brother, Menelaus offered Antiochus three hundred talents more than he had received from Jason, (appx. $13,000,000) So, Antiochus sold the office of high priest to Menelaus.
D. Antiochus’ rise to power
1. Verse 24 says, “For he will rise to power with only a few people. In a time of tranquility, he will enter the richest parts of the realm, and he will accomplish what his fathers never did, nor his ancestors;”
From Barnes Notes
“The meaning of this seems to be, that at first, his own forces would be small, and that he would go up in such a way as not to excite suspicion. [He later increased] his forces, [and] united himself [with his] confederates and lured the people by the promise of rewards. By gradually taking one town after another and adding them to his dominions, he became strong.” Thus, he “seized the kingdom by intrigue.”
2. Verse 24 says, “He shall disperse among them the plunder, spoil, and riches; and he shall devise his plans against the strongholds, but only for a time.”
Antiochus was an artist at securing allegiance through the redistribution of wealth. In order to gain as much acceptance as possible among both the people and those of power and influence, Antiochus would lavish his plunder upon them. These displays of generosity were matters of public spectacle. It would seem that money and riches were important to Antiochus only as a means to an end. 1 Maccabees, 3:30 tells us that in his liberality, and in the giving of gifts, he had surpassed all the kings who had preceded him. Polybius records that when Antiochus would meet “accidentally with people whom he had never seen before, he would enrich them with unexpected presents; and sometimes, standing in the public streets, he would throw money, and cry aloud, ‘Let him take it to whom fortune shall give it.’” (Benson)
3. “And he will devise his schemes against strongholds, but only for a time.”
a. In other words, he would plot against Egypt and develop strategies for taking control of the southern kingdom.
b. “But only for a time” because, his plans for Egyptian conquest would be thwarted by Rome.
IX. Antiochus’ Campaign Against Egypt in 25-28.
“And with a large army he will stir up his power and his courage against the king of the South, (Ptolemy VI) who will mobilize a very large and powerful army but will not withstand the plots devised against him. Those who eat from his provisions will seek to destroy him; his army will be swept away, and many will fall slain.”
“And the two kings, with their hearts bent on evil, will speak lies at the same table, but to no avail, for still the end will come at the appointed time. (The time appointed by the Almighty.) The king of the North will return to his land with great wealth, but his heart will be set against the holy covenant; so, he will do damage and return to his own land.”
“At the appointed time he will invade the South again, but this time will not be like the first. Ships of Kittim will come against him, and he will lose heart.”
A. Antiochus mobilizes against Egypt.
Barnes Notes
What Antiochus accomplished that all of his predecessors had failed to accomplish was that he took “complete control of Egypt. The wars of his predecessors with the Egyptians had been mostly waged in Coelo-Syria and Palestine, for the possession of those provinces. Antiochus, however, first took Pelusium, the key of Egypt, and then invaded Egypt itself, [and] seized upon its strongest places, and made the king a captive.”
Part of the reason for this mobilization against Egypt was a dispute over Coelo-Syria. Benson tells us that “Ptolemy demanded Antiochus surrender Coelo-Syria to him [which he felt belonged to him by] virtue of the marriage articles between Ptolemy V and Cleopatra I. But instead of complying with Ptolemy’s demand, Antiochus invaded Egypt with a vast force by both land and by sea.”
In response, Ptolemy dispatched strong forces to stop Antiochus and the two armies first met in battle between Pelusium and mount Cassius. Although Antiochus defeated the armies of Egypt, he still did not yet gain possession of Pelusium.
“In his next campaign, [Antiochus] would have greater success. He routed the Egyptians and took Pelusium, then ascended as far as Memphis, and made himself master of all Egypt.” 1 Maccabees 1:17-19 says, “Wherefore, he entered Egypt with a great multitude, with chariots, and elephants, and horsemen, and a great navy.”
Volkmann says that “in 169 BC, [Antiochus] occupied Egypt with the exception of the capitol city of Alexandria.”
B. Verse 26 says that Ptolemy's own people would also scheme against him. "…those who eat of the portion of his delicacies shall destroy him; his army shall be swept away, and many shall fall down slain.”
Volkmann says that “the misfortunes of Ptolemy were ascribed to the treachery and baseness of his own ministers and subjects. Ptolemy Macron, who was governor of Cyprus, [also] revolted [against] Ptolemy VI and delivered up [Cyprus] to Antiochus. [Even] the Alexandrians, seeing the weakness of Ptolemy VI renounced their allegiance to him and proclaimed his younger brother [Physcon] as king instead.” (The word means “fatty.” He is otherwise called Ptolemy VIII).
. This may suggest that “full of eyes,” refers to their appearance as being one of shining brilliance. As it relates to the little horn it may represent intellectual shrewdness, certainly to a degree that is superior to the three which were rooted up. But, the phrase “eyes of a man” is used in conjunction with the speaking of “pompous words.” This may then suggest that this little horn viewed things only through the lens of human understanding as opposed to the saints he was persecuting who saw things through the eyes of revealed knowledge. The persecution of the saints is the result of a mind that rejects revealed knowledge because he sees reality through the eyes of a man.
