Kings of the North and South: Taking Another Look at Daniel’s Prophecy
What can we learn from Daniel’s vision of the ram and male goat that symbolized the ancient empires of Persia and Greece? Can this prophecy help us understand the geopolitical relevancy of the prophecy concerning the kings of the north and south as recorded by Daniel? The Apostle Paul argued that the gentiles were—until the time of Christ—outside the Commonwealth of Israel respective to salvation and the national promises afforded to the descendants of Abraham. But at the time of Paul’s ministry the tribes of the commonwealth—once a unified regional empire under one government in the region of Palestine—were expectedly functioning as a dispersed, yet identifiable, peoples in their diaspora throughout parts of Central Asia, Asia Minor and the fringes of Eastern Europe. Paul also said that because of the commonwealth’s dispersion, and their rejection of the covenant made at Mt. Sinai, the peoples of Israel had solidified for themselves a form of spiritual “blindness,” which allowed Paul to reason from the commonwealth’s situation that God would make the holy spirit available to the gentile peoples, but not to the exclusion of all the peoples of Israel. This led Paul to further conclude that the commonwealth—by in large—would function in ignorance of their earliest national identity “until the fullness of the nations [gentiles] comes in; and so all Israel will be saved, even as it has been written, ‘The Deliverer will come out of Zion, and He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob’” (Rom. 11:25, LITV). Making for an important geopolitical issue regarding the Commonwealth of Israel that was certainly a part of the teachings of Jesus. Because Jesus also used the same context as Paul when he spoke of the “days of vengeance,” which would refer to the vengeance granted to Jesus by God, and Jesus continued by saying that there would be “great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people,” and that “Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled” (Lk. 21:22-24). (See also, Heb. 10:30-31.) (Author’s emphasis throughout.) Notably, Jesus was speaking about a time of political and economic distress that some nations would bring upon the city of Jerusalem, which would affect not only the current nation-state of Israel, but also the currently existing and dispersed peoples of the commonwealth of Israel. Foretelling, then, of a time when a final military and political incursion would attempt to further magnify the governance and political will of those nations that are destined to eventually create a greater conflict centered in this region of the Middle East. What then could this mean for the city of Jerusalem? From an historical perspective, it is obvious that the city of Jerusalem has been subject to many military and political incursions, at least since the time of Tigleth-pileser III of Assyria. Which allows us to say that Jerusalem has long been subject to some form of geopolitical domination beginning with the time of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, which continued through the Babylonian period, the Medo-Persian rule, and the Greco-Macedonian influence, until the collapse of the commonwealth came at the hands of the Classical Roman Empire. Also, we do well to consider the period of the Byzantine Empire and the later Ottoman Empire that continued to play a part in the political affairs of Jerusalem until the end of World War I. (We cannot forget that Jerusalem became subject to the will of the great powers after World War II, as understood from the United Nations mandate regarding Palestine.) Leading us to consider that when Jesus spoke of the “times of the gentiles,” it was notably understood by the disciples of Jesus, which brings us to think about how it was that Paul and the other apostles knew about this period of distress that would precede the return of Christ. Noting also that Jesus used this geopolitical context to warn the disciples—and the church that would develop from their teachings—that an “abomination of desolation” would come upon the city of Jerusalem, the State of Israel and the region of Palestine, leading to an unprecedented conflict with the coming kingdom of God. (Political actions such as this would undoubtedly reflect an indignant view of the covenant made with the patriarch Abraham.) For Jesus said: “when ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place,” then know with certainty that a “great tribulation,” will soon begin, and “except those days [“days of vengeance”] should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened” (Mt. 24:15, 22). Making then the “times of the gentiles” and the war that brings “desolations”—noted in the seventy-weeks prophecy—to be mutually inclusive geopolitical events that will be significantly different from any other time in the history of the region of Palestine and the city of Jerusalem—and also the world. Bringing us to further consider the vision that was given to Daniel regarding the kings of the north and south, because Daniel had written that a “king of the north” would come to power, and with his coming to power an “abomination of desolation” is established, and this individual involves himself in the religious and political affairs of Israel. This would then trigger a related series of long-term events leading to a “time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that time” (Dan. 12:1). (Daniel also places this “time of trouble” at the return of Jesus (Dan. 11:31, 35).) What, then, would bring the world into such a politically and economically chaotic state where the city of Jerusalem would become subject to the political will of competing coalitions that will lead to years of distress for the Middle East and eventually a world conflict at the return of Christ? We can begin to address this question by reviewing the vision that was given to Daniel in the third year of King Belshazzar’s reign over Babylon, not long