Theological Thesis of Daniel 8
As we look at the period of 2300 days, it is worth noting that this period is referenced with regard to the scriptural use of numeric periods in time such as 3, 7, 10, 12, 14, 23, 50, 70, 1,000, and in this case 2300 as a multiple of 23. God uses significant numbers in relation to the significance of time:
The figure twenty-three occurs in 1 Enoch 90:5 NRSV: “And I saw until that twenty-three had undertaken the pasturing”. Of the seventy shepherds who have oversight of the Jews during the Gentile domination, twenty-three have this responsibility for the early Hellenistic period. By implication, another group of twenty-three are responsible during the Persian period (Porter, Metaphors, 44). 1
Jeremiah noted that he had preached a strong warning to Israel and Judah and other nations, for 23 long years, though few listened, which would end in the exile to Babylon. Twenty-three seems to be a numeric referenced in relation to God’s disciplinary time-frames, in combination with his overseeing mercy mixed with judgement. We see this here as a time when God is posed to discipline his people yet works to warn and advise his people of the coming troubles with a duration of preached prophetic warnings about coming discipline:
“For twenty-three years, from the thirteenth year of Josiah the son of Amon, king of Judah, to this day, the word of the LORD has come to me, and I have spoken persistently to you, but you have not listened.” (Jeremiah 25:3)
The first sixty-nine of the seventy weeks of years from the exile to the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (Dan 9:24–27) might also be seen as three times twenty-three.
The 2,300 days may, then, suggest a fixed “significant” chronological period in the region of six or seven years with regard to a particular struggle God’s people were enduring under disciplines imposed by their Roman enemies in Judah. 2
Interpretive caution regarding conjoining chapters Daniel 8 and 9
While we will be looking only at a prophecy of Daniel found in Daniel chapter 8, a little caution is due. Some commentators conjoin the 70 weeks of Daniel 9 which clearly refers to the period ending with the first advent of Christ, with the shorter 2300-day (evenings and mornings) prophecy which we mention here because they are both in Daniel.
The 70 weeks is another study with a completely different revelation regarding a much further period of time — the period stretching to the first advent of Christ, his crucifixion and resurrection:
“Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy place”. (Daniel 9: 24)
The 2300-Day prophecy articulates: 2300 Mornings and Evenings
Good commentators refer to the 2300 mornings and evenings prophecy as the “2300-day prophecy” while a very few interpreters increase the timeline to mean 2300 years, one day for a year. We will soon see why this does not apply to the 2300-day prophecy.
The sanctuary context in the paradigm of the morning and evening sacrifices – present real actions relative to a real sanctuary of the Jewish people which occurred on actual days, twice daily, morning and evening. 3
The first half of chapter 8 concludes with a discussion between two celestial creatures about “how long” will the sanctuary and its ritual be disrupted? While the one celestial being directs his question to the other, it is notable that the answer is addressed not to the celestial being, but rather to Daniel (Daniel 8:14): “It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be re-consecrated.” The phrase “How long” echoes a frequent lament in the Psalms regarding troubling events occurring among the people of God, especially during the Babylonian Captivity. (cf. Psalms 6:3; 13:1–2; 35:17).
Dr Longman notes:
The interpretation of this chronological statement by the angel regarding 2300 evenings and mornings has encountered much disagreement about the interpretation of the symbolism of the chapter. Literally, the phrase translates “evening, morning—two thousand, three hundred.” Does this mean 2300 days, reflecting the language of Genesis 1 “there was evening, and there was morning”—defining the creation days? 4
This seems to make the most sense in the context of the prophecy which presents a horrifying picture of the sanctuary and its holy place as being desecrated: “How long will the vision about the regular sacrifice apply, while the transgression causes horror, so as to allow both the holy place and the host to be trampled?” He said to me, “For 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the holy place will be properly restored.” (Daniel 8:13-14 NASB)
Others think it may mean 1150 days, with the reference to evening and morning being to the daily sacrifices? In other words, were there 1150 morning sacrifices and 1150 evening sacrifices, totalling 2300 sacrifices but 1150 days? I would argue this refers to entire days in reference to the 2300 number when you think like this: each of the 2300 days having both a morning and evening sacrifice.
The Hebrew scholar Dr E. Goldingay asserts:
Why should 2,300 evenings and mornings be taken to denote 1,150 days? An evening and morning make one day (Gen 1:5–31; the order of evening and morning there explains that here). The morning and evening whole offering were seen as one unit rather than as two independent ones which could then naturally be counted separately, noting especially Ezra 3:3–5. The natural way to understand the phrase is as denoting 2,300 days. 5
Gabriel interprets the animal symbolism given earlier in the chapter in a precise manner. Unlike chapter 7, where the animals are said to be “four kingdoms,” here they are identified with particular and well-known political entities. The ram with the two horns represents the “kings of Media and Persia” (Daniel 8:20). In the vision itself, one horn grew larger than the other — a reference to the Persian part of this empire soon swallowed up the superior Median part which assumed dominance.
Further, the goat with the single horn that speedily devastated the ram is “Greece,” the single horn being its first king—Alexander the Great. Alexander speedily achieved domination from Italy to India. Then he died suddenly at age 33 in 323 B.C., leaving behind two young sons, Alexander and Herakles, both boys being murdered. Then as history goes, the world was divvied up between Alexander’s powerful generals, the Diadochi – the “four prominent horns” (Daniel 8:8, 22). The focus goes immediately to one particular horn. Scholars almost universally agree that the horn that grew out of one of the four is the second century B.C. Seleucid ruler, Antiochus IV Epiphanes – this terrifying king is clearly depicted in the intertestamental writings like the Maccabees.
Longman defines the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes:
He was a “master of intrigue” (Daniel 8:23). He managed to push his nephew out of the way and gain the throne. He grew large through military success, pushing his influence into Egypt as well as east into Persian, Parthia, and Armenia, not to speak of his domination of Palestine. Antiochus IV, however, established himself as a “completely wicked” and “stern-faced king” (Daniel 8:23) through his incredible intrusion and disruption of the Jewish ritual. Jewish religion and practice stood in the way of his policy of Hellenization, and among other atrocities, he ordered the cessation of temple sacrifice in 167 B.C. and profaned the temple by introducing a holy object sacred to the god Zeus, to which he sacrificed a pig, abhorrent to the Jewish religion. This holy object has been suggested to be a meteorite that became a cult object that the Jews referred to as “an abomination that causes desolation” (Daniel 9:27). 6
J. Edlin conveys the same logic regarding the suppression of Antiochus IV. He believes that “In the midst of these circumstances, the book of Daniel could infuse courage into Jewish resistance. Daniel’s refusal to compromise his religious convictions, his survey of the coming and going of nations, and his predictions of God’s final victory would provide needed perspective and encouragement for the Maccabean rebels”. He notes also:
In 167 B.C., Antiochus IV suppressed the practices of Judaism, pillaged the Jerusalem temple and rededicated it to Zeus, and martyred those who did not comply with his commands. According to 2 Macc 6:5–6 NRSV: “The altar was covered with abominable offerings that were forbidden by the laws. People could neither keep the Sabbath, nor observe the festivals of their ancestors, nor so much as confess themselves to be Jews.” Such events provoked a full-scale revolt, a daring guerrilla war led by Judas Maccabeus and his family of Hasmonean descendants. The odds in favour of the Seleucids were overwhelming. 7
J.E. Goldengay, a renowned Daniel scholar is in agreement that indeed we must view the culprit in Daniel 8 as none other than Antiochus and his timing in history:
Presumably, the holy ones are discussing the vision’s meaning. The seer only catches the end of their conversation; cf. the allusive nature of the vision/audition in Zech 1:7–17. While they may be assumed to be members of the heavenly/earthly army who are themselves discomfited by Antiochus’s actions, perhaps their “how long” (Daniel 12:6) stems simply from their concern for afflicted Jews, as in Zech 1:7–17 (which underlies Dan 8). 8
Goldengay, asserts that the “how long” connects with that vision, and the pleas expressed in the lament psalms concerning the devastation of the land and the defiling of the sanctuary (Ps 74:9–10; 79:5; 80:5; 89:47; 6:4; 13:2; 90:13; 94:3; also Isa 6:11; Jer 12:4; 2 Esd 6:59 NRSV). The cry of the holy ones takes up the cry of afflicted Israel.
The revered historian, Josephus advised that Daniel 8 refers to the defilement of the sanctuary by Antiochus IV again confirming the culprit in Daniel 8 — again stating his reputation as a historian as Antiochus and his timing in history:
This is the title 2 Macc 6:2 NRSV gives the god to whom Antiochus dedicated the Jerusalem temple. According to 1 Macc 1:54 NRSV, the abomination was erected on the altar of sacrifice, and this has usually suggested it was an image of Zeus (and of Antiochus, according to Porphyry). 1 Macc 1:59 NRSV, however, speaks of there being a (pagan) altar erected on the altar of sacrifice (cf. Josephus, Ant. 12.5.4 [12.253]). This implies rather that the setting up of the abomination consists in the rebuilding of the altar for it to serve a different cult (as in Judges 6:25–26). 9
Antiochus IV’s historic period only reckons with the 2300 literal days, not the 2300 years interpretation, thus destroying the period’s ending of 1844 – and its concomitant idea of Christ waiting in an anteroom until then to go into the presence of His father – quite a preposterous misuse of scripture.
The idea of the end-time in Daniel explained
The use of the term “End”, when set in its context tells us whether the “End” refers to the end of a particular period of time or to the future final eschatological “end of time” of the last days. The notion of a period characterized by wrath is one of the aspects of Daniel 8 that reflects Zechariah 1:12, where the exile is a period of wrath. The context here indicates that reference to wrath does not denote that God is over-extending his time of punishing Israel for their sin: although their sin was the original cause of the exile. The ongoing period of wrath is one in which they are continuing to be treated harshly rather than compassionately because of the hostility of their enemies rather than because of their own sin.
In a parallel way 1 Macc 1:64 NRSV speaks of Antiochus’s persecution as the coming of very great wrath on Israel (cf. 2 Kgs 3:27). There, too, Israel’s transgressions contributed to what happened (1 Macc 1:11–15 NRSV; 1 Macc 1: 43 NRSV; 1 Macc 1:52–53 NRSV) but 1 Maccabees hardly implies that Antiochus’s persecution is simply God’s punishment of Israel’s sin. Neither in Dan 8 is it likely that the seer views Israel’s experience as God’s punishment for their sin. Dan 11:30 may even mean that it is not God’s wrath that is (solely) in mind). 10
Both the seventy years of exile, which Daniel 9 sees as extending to the Antiochene period, and the Antiochene period, in particular, are periods of wrath in the sense of oppression and suffering. The time of wrath referred to in Daniel 8:19 might be either of these, but the link with Zechariah 1 and the fact that the vision begins with the Persian era suggest that the whole period from the exile to Antiochus is the period of wrath denoted here, though extended unmercifully by an evil perpetrator Antiochus IV’s abuses beyond Yahweh’s punishment of exile.
Both the seventy years of exile, which Dan 9 sees as extending to the Antiochene period, and the Antiochene period, in particular, are however periods of wrath in the sense of oppression and suffering. Compare Zech 1:14-17 especially: “Cry out, Thus says the Lord of hosts: I am exceedingly jealous for Jerusalem and for Zion. And I am exceedingly angry with the nations that are at ease; for while I was angry but a little, they furthered the disaster. 11
The time of wrath referred to in Daniel 8:19 may well explain the havoc Antiochus was unmercifully overextending on the Jews exilic judgements. It is noteworthy that in Zechariah ch. 1 the vision begins with the Persian era suggesting that the whole period from the exile to Antiochus is the period of extended wrath denoted here.
Evidently “the time of the end” is the period leading up to the End of – setting it in context — the period in which the audience of these visions themselves live. This also fits Daniel 8:17–19: the phrase denotes the final act of that historical drama which will come to its actual end with Antiochus’s fall and the sanctuary’s restoration. Daniel is not thinking of the absolute eschatological final and absolute End for all events when human history comes to a close. 12
In fact, further human history on earth is presupposed by talk of the restoration of the sanctuary, as it was by talk of a new kingdom in Daniel 2:44; 7:14, 18, 27.
Summary view of Daniel 8
In Daniel 8:8 the goat became exceedingly great. Alexander the Great’s kingdom extended all the way to India, exceeding any kingdom before it in size (approx. 1.5 million square miles/3,885,000 square km). There came up four conspicuous horns. After the death of Alexander the Great in 323 B.C., his two sons initially took over the empire, but ultimately, after serious internal struggles, four of his generals divided his kingdom into four parts (cf. v. 22 and 7:6). Further in Daniel 8:8 the goat became exceedingly great. Alexander the Great’s kingdom extended all the way to India, exceeding any kingdom before it in size (approx. 1.5 million square miles/3,885,000 square km).
There came up four conspicuous horns. After the death of Alexander the Great in 323 B.C., his two sons initially took over the empire, but ultimately, after serious internal struggles, four of his generals divided his kingdom into four parts (cf. v. 22 and 7:6). In Daniel 8:9–10 a little horn grows out of one of the four horns and expands his realm. Scholars are almost unanimous in recognizing this little horn as the eighth ruler of the Seleucid dynasty, Antiochus IV Epiphanes (ruled 175–164 B.C.; see notes on vv. 23 and 25). The glorious land most likely refers to Palestine as God’s primary centre of operations and the location of his people. The little horn, Antiochus Epiphanes, persecuted the faithful Jews and profaned the temple (168 B.C.; see 8:23). He prefigures the man of lawlessness, the final Antichrist, the great opponent of God’s people (2 Thess. 2:3–4, 7–12; Rev. 12:4).
In Daniel 8:12–14 we see that because of renewed transgression on the part of God’s people, the saints and the temple sacrifices were handed over into the hands of Antiochus IV, but only for a limited period: 2,300 evenings and mornings, or a little over six years (perhaps signifying the period from 170 B.C., the death of Onias III, the high priest, to December 14, 164, when Judas Maccabeus cleansed and rededicated the temple; cf. 1 Macc. 4:52 NRSV).
In the end, the little horn would be judged and the sanctuary restored to its rightful state. Unlike the less precise “time, times, and half a time” of Dan. 7:25, this period is measured in days, suggesting that God has a precise calendar for the times of his people’s suffering, even though it is utterly inscrutable to human wisdom. 13
Compliment your study of The 2300-Day Prophecy with a biblical new testament study: Christ: High Priest of a New Covenant.
1 Goldingay, J. E. (1998). Daniel (Vol. 30, p. 213). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.
2 Ibid
3 Year for a day
4 Longman, T., III. (1999). Daniel (pp. 204–205). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.
5 Goldingay, J. E. (1998). Daniel (Vol. 30, p. 213). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.
6 Longman, T., III. (1999). Daniel (pp. 206–207). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.
7 Edlin, J. (2009). Daniel: A Commentary in the Wesleyan Tradition (pp. 30–31). Kansas City, MO: Beacon Hill Press of Kansas City.
8 Goldingay, J. E. (1998). Daniel (Vol. 30, pp. 211–212). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.
9 Josephus’s quotation from the Phoenician historian Dius in C.Ap. 1.17 [C.Ap. 113].
10 Goldingay, J. E. (1998). Daniel (Vol. 30, p. 215). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.
11 Ibid
12 Crossway Bibles. (2008). The ESV Study Bible (p. 1603). Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles.
13 Ibid
