The Narrow Path Ministries

It seems most futurists see Daniel 11:36 as a verse that suddenly transports the context from the 2nd century BC to the reign of the Anti-Christ during during a future Tribulation. When I was a Futurist this was a majorly troubling assertion.

However, as a partial preterist, I still have trouble with this text because up until verse 36 we seem to have a really accurate account of Antiochus Epiphanes and then after 36 it seems to largely depart from history. This seems to be evidence in favor of those who hold that Daniel was actually written during the lifetime of Antiochus Ephiphanes and was just wrong in it's predictions of his downfall (and prophesying the earlier details of his life ex eventu)

As I partial preterist, I have considered that verse 36 might indeed transition from Antiochus to another Greek or Roman ruler shortly after him, but not to my satisfaction.

I'm curious what Steve thinks about this.... or others.

Perhaps this thread would be better on the eschatology folder. Can anyone move it there?

Chris sent me a copy of an old book by Phil Mauro and I was very impressed by his exegesis of Daniel 11-12, finding it a very satisfying "preterist" take on the subject. Has anyone else read him and what do you think?

Hello Anochria,

I read something recently where Herod was seen as the king following Antiochus Epiphanes, and I think the view was credited to Phillip Mauro? Is that what you found? I thought it seemed credible.

l2j

Yep. With a couple of clarifications w/ the Hebrew it fits like a glove.