Daniel 8:1–27

TABLE 1.12: Different “Little Horns”? Comparing the Visions of Daniel 7 and 8

Daniel saw the little horn of 8:9 become “exceedingly great” toward the south and east and toward “the glorious land.” This spread of dominion encroached upon territory the Jews would have interpreted as their Promised Land (cf. 11:16, 41, where the title “glorious land” is repeated). It sounded an ominous tone, suggesting a conflict with God’s people. Although the individual denoted by the little horn may have had an insignificant beginning, his “growth” refers to his intimidating expansion of power and indomitable conquering spirit.

The ominous tone increased in volume with the words of 8:10: the little horn “grew great, even to the host of heaven.” This ruler was indeed a force to be reckoned with! He caused conflict with the “host of heaven,” a phrase sometimes referring to the stars in the heavens (cf. Isa. 40:26). As the little horn reached for the stars, his arrogance was on display. He strove for a status of which no mere man is worthy. And since God was the creator of the stars in the heavens, the actions of the little horn were ultimately against God himself.

But the “host of heaven” probably symbolized the saints of God as well, for Daniel reported that “some of the host and some of the stars it threw down to the ground and trampled” (Dan. 8:10), and the interpretation of this event is that the little horn shall “destroy mighty men and the people who are the saints” (v. 24). Trampling the heavenly host, then, is equivalent to prevailing over the saints. Initially, the association of stars with saints may seem unusual, but later in 12:3 it is said that the resurrected saints “shall shine like the brightness of the sky above; . . . like the stars forever and ever.” Speaking of the saints as “the host of heaven” (8:10) evoked the glory and abundance of God’s people. After all, God had told Abraham that his descendants would exceed the number of stars in the sky (Gen. 15:5; 22:17).

The imagery of trampling underfoot implies the defeat of the host. According to Genesis 3:15, the seed of the serpent’s offspring would be at enmity with the woman’s offspring, and this hostility manifested itself whenever the opponents of God came against his people. Because the seed of the woman experienced defeat in Daniel 8:10, for the moment it may have seemed as if the promise of Genesis 3:15 had been reversed.

8:11–12 The arrogance of the little horn knew no bounds. He continued to elevate himself, “even as great as the Prince of the host” (v. 11). If the “host” refers to God’s people—the saints—then “Prince of the host” probably refers to their leader. A previous context of conquest may be helpful in interpreting the title: in Joshua 5:14–15, Joshua encountered “the commander of the army of the LORD,” before whom Joshua fell in worship and removed his sandals. This commander or prince of God’s army was probably the angel of Yahweh, a figure distinct from other created angels and perhaps equivalent to the preincarnate second person of the Trinity. In Daniel 8:11, then, the blasphemous little horn sought to become great like the divine Prince of God’s people.

The little horn disrupted temple worship. The daily sacrifices (cf. Ex. 29:38–42 for the morning and evening offerings) were impeded and the sanctuary overthrown. According to Daniel 8:12, the little horn did these things “because of transgression,” suggesting his actions were some kind of judgment. But whose transgression was in view? Most likely the Jews’, God’s covenant people, who provoked him with their covenant-breaking ways.

When Daniel saw this vision, the temple had already been destroyed—in 586 BC—by the Babylonian army. If Daniel’s vision consisted of the “glorious land” (v. 9) and Jews in that land (v. 10) offering regular sacrifices at the temple (v. 11), then the fulfillment of his vision must have occurred after the return from exile and the rebuilding of the Jerusalem temple. This news was thus both good and bad: good, because God’s people would be brought back from exile and into the Promised Land, where they would rebuild the sanctuary and worship Yahweh; bad, because apparently their subsequent unfaithfulness would lead to persecution and the disruption of temple activity (vv. 11–12).

The little horn would “throw truth to the ground.” If this vile figure was going to trample the saints and desecrate the sanctuary, the “truth” he would throw to the ground was probably the Torah, the Law of God specifying how the Israelites should worship him and live as his people.

Although Daniel could not have known the identity of this figure, as history unfolded the terrible ruler Antiochus IV Epiphanes conformed closest to this prophesied blasphemer. There is “virtually unanimous agreement that this little horn must be identified as the Seleucid king Antiochus IV, who persecuted the Jews and desecrated God’s temple.”⁵ Antiochus ruled from 175 to 164 BC, and 2 Maccabees reports how he ordered a slaughter of Jews, resulting in approximately forty thousand dying by violence and around the same number being sold into slavery (2 Macc. 5:12–14). Antiochus attacked the temple and, in 167 BC, ordered the cessation of regular offerings (1 Macc. 1:20–24). On December 6, 167, he set up an idol to Zeus on the altar of the temple, thus desecrating the sanctuary (1 Macc. 1:54; 2 Macc. 6:1–2), and on December 16 he defiled the altar by offering pagan sacrifices, including pigs (1 Macc. 1:44–47, 59; 2 Macc. 6:4). He cast down the “truth” by forbidding practices commanded in the Law (keeping Sabbath, circumcision) and forcing Jews to adopt Greek customs and religious practices (1 Macc. 1:41–51; 2 Macc. 6:1–11). Engaging in such atrocities, Antiochus would “act and prosper” (Dan. 8:12).

8:13 Daniel heard the voice of “a holy one speaking”—an angel.⁶ A second angel (“another holy one”) asked the speaker, “For how long is the vision concerning the regular burnt offering, the transgression that makes desolate, and the giving over of the sanctuary and host to be trampled underfoot?” (Cf. comment on 11:31.) Whenever God’s people endure suffering, a frequent question is, “How long?” (Pss. 13:1–2; 79:5; 80:4; Rev. 6:10).

8:14 The other angel answered, “For 2,300 evenings and mornings. Then the sanctuary shall be restored to its rightful state.” Whatever this specific time frame meant, the good news was that at a point subsequent to the desecration caused by the little horn, God’s temple would be restored. This promise would provide hope to those living amid the raging of Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

“Evenings and mornings” reminds us of Genesis 1, where “there was evening and there was morning” occurs six times (Gen. 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31). The phrase in Daniel 8:14 may mean that a certain number of days were in view, since “evening” and “morning” denote a day in Genesis 1. Moreover, regular temple sacrifices were made every “evening” and “morning,” so the language in Daniel 8:14 could be alluding to the sacrificial system.

However, how best to interpret “2,300” is debatable. If literal days are meant, then 2,300 days is approximately six years and three months. This timeline does not appear to be historically significant, however, nor does it account for the use of “evenings” and “mornings” (rather than “days”) in this verse. A literal rendering of the angel’s words is “evening, morning, two thousand and three hundred.”⁷ The specification of “evening” and “morning” probably suggests a certain number of sacrifices over a certain number of days. Since sacrifices were made “morning” and “evening,” 2,300 sacrifices would take place over a span of 1,150 days. The 2,300, therefore, counted the sacrifices, not the days.⁸

The number 1,150 was historically significant during the terror inflicted by Antiochus: the period from the temple’s desecration (December 6, 167 BC; 1 Macc. 1:54) to its first sacrifice on the newly consecrated altar (December 14, 164; 1 Macc. 4:52–53) was 1,106 days (164 BC being a Julian leap year). When one angel asked about the time period from desecration to restoration (Dan. 8:13), the other angel answered with a number near 1,150 (v. 14). The use of round or approximate numbers was an acceptable practice and was not considered failed prophecy.⁹ Understood this way, the angel’s answer was proved correct in the unfolding of historical events. Judas Maccabeus recaptured Jerusalem, purified the temple Antiochus had defiled, and erected a new altar to reestablish sacrificial activity for the Jewish people.¹⁰ Jews instituted the remembrance of the temple’s rededication in a feast known as Hanukkah, which Jesus celebrated (cf. John 10:22–23).

8:15 After Daniel reported what he saw and heard in the vision (vv. 1–14), he recounted the interpretation that followed (vv. 15–27). His desire was to understand the vision, and he reported that suddenly “there stood before me one having the appearance of a man”; the reader will soon learn that this was an angel.

8:16 A voice between the banks of the Ulai spoke to the figure who had appeared to Daniel and said, “Gabriel, make this man understand the vision.” This figure appeared “between the banks of the Ulai,” a place where no mere mortal could hover. The voice belonged to God, who commands his angels (cf. Ps. 91:11). In words Daniel could understand, God named the figure (“Gabriel”) and commanded that an interpretation be given. This is the first time in Scripture an angel’s name is mentioned.

8:17 Gabriel approached Daniel in obedience to God’s voice, but the angel’s appearance frightened Daniel, who fell on his face. Ezekiel had a similar reaction upon seeing the living creatures surrounding the throne of God (Ezek. 1:28); like Ezekiel, Daniel was addressed as “son of man” (cf. Ezek. 2:1, 3, 6, etc.).

Gabriel referenced the timing of the vision’s fulfillment: “Understand, O son of man, that the vision is for the time of the end.” The language of “the end” informed Daniel that the future fulfillment of these events would occur beyond his own lifetime; he would not see the rise and atrocities of the little horn. The “end” in view was the completion of the “2,300 evenings and mornings” (Dan. 8:14), so Gabriel may be referring specifically to the “end” of the persecution that occupied almost half of the vision (vv. 9–14).

8:18 Daniel had already reacted to seeing Gabriel (v. 17), and now he reacted to hearing him: “I fell into a deep sleep with my face to the ground.” This was reminiscent of Isaiah, who, in the presence of the thrice-holy God and his winged angels, was “lost” (Isa. 6:1–7). Daniel adopted a prostrate position, symbolizing fear and unworthiness. Though Gabriel was not God, he was a messenger of God, and Daniel was consumed with fear.

Daniel reported that Gabriel “touched me and made me stand up.” This event would reoccur in chapter 10 when Daniel again fell into a deep sleep and a hand set him upright (10:9–11). In Ezekiel’s prophetic call, God’s Spirit enabled him to stand and receive the word God had for him (Ezek. 2:1–3), and both Jeremiah (Jer. 1:9) and Isaiah (Isa. 6:7) were touched to enable their prophetic ministry. Daniel, likewise, was strengthened to hear and report God’s word.

8:19 Gabriel explained why he had come: “I will make known to you what shall be at the latter end of the indignation, for it refers to the appointed time of the end.” The “latter end of the indignation” most likely shares the same referent as “the time of the end” (v. 17) and “the appointed time of the end” (v. 19). These phrases refer to the acts of the little horn, Antiochus IV Epiphanes—particularly his assaults against the Jews in Jerusalem.

8:20 Though several verses in the vision were devoted to the ram (vv. 3–7), Gabriel merely identified the ram’s two horns (vv. 3, 20) before moving on to the goat. The ram’s horns represented “the kings of Media and Persia,” confirming that the beast itself was the Medo-Persian Empire. The Medo-Persian rule lasted from 539 to 331 BC, spanning the period from its conquest of Babylon to its being conquered by Greece.

8:21 Gabriel next interpreted the second animal of Daniel’s vision: the goat was “the king of Greece.” Greece defeated the Medo-Persians in 331 BC, headed by the goat’s “great horn between his eyes”—Alexander, “the first king.”

8:22 This “great horn” (v. 21) “was broken,” which was fulfilled in 323 BC when Alexander the Great died; in his place “four others arose.” These “four others” were his four generals—Cassander, Lysimachus, Seleucus, and Ptolemy—who assumed control over different portions of the Greek Empire.

The final phrase of verse 22 (“but not with his power”) may imply that God was the power behind these historical events. God broke the horn (Alexander), and by his sovereign control over history four generals took Alexander’s place. God brings down and lifts up, and none can stay his hand (cf. 4:34–35). It is also possible the phrase describes the lesser power of the four kingdoms: they would replace Alexander but not be as great as he. The four rulers were depicted with “horns” (8:8), but only Alexander was a “great horn” (v. 21).

8:23 At “the latter end” of the rule of these generals, “a king of bold face, one who understands riddles, shall arise.” Because the vision described “a little horn” growing out of the four (vv. 8–9), this “king of bold face” must be that little horn—Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who descended from the Seleucids and came to power in 175 BC. The timing of his arrival would be by divine decree, for God had appointed a “limit” to the deeds of “the transgressors,” a pejorative term probably referring to Jews who would transgress the Torah and urge other Jews to do so as well (1 Macc. 1:11–15). When the transgressors reached the limit of their sin, Antiochus would arise on the stage of history as the instrument of divine judgment.

The little horn was a “king of bold face” and “one who understands riddles” (Dan. 8:23). The first description denotes his boldness and arrogance in assaulting the Jews and their sanctuary. The second describes his intellectual prowess and cleverness. No doubt Daniel would have considered himself one who understood riddles, so the fact that this “king of bold face” could likewise understand riddles may have been unsettling to Daniel.

8:24 The little horn “shall be great—but not by his own power,” reminding the reader that rulers rule where and when they do because of God’s sovereign will (cf. 2:21; 4:35). With this power the king “shall cause fearful destruction and shall succeed in what he does, and destroy mighty men and the people who are the saints.” Antiochus’s conquests included “the glorious land” (cf. 8:9), where he trampled the saints—depicted in verse 10 as the starry host he threw down to the ground. Thousands of Jews would be killed.

8:25 The opening phrase—“By his cunning”—echoes verse 23 and the arrogant king’s intelligence and cleverness. Like the serpent in Genesis 3:1, Antiochus would be shrewd enough to “make deceit prosper under his hand,” and this success would inflate his ego. Antiochus’s appended title “Epiphanes” indicated his self-identification as someone in whom God was manifest.

The ominous prediction “Without warning he shall destroy many” may refer to the brutal invasion of Jerusalem and eventual desecration of its temple. According to 1 Maccabees 1:29–32, Antiochus pillaged the city, set it ablaze, demolished its homes, and captured women and children. This assault against God’s people set him against God himself: “He shall even rise up against the Prince of princes” (cf. “Prince” in Dan. 8:11). Although Antiochus appeared to prosper without repercussion or rival, the Prince of princes would be both superior and triumphant. The little horn “shall be broken—but by no human hand,” a confirmation that God’s judgment would befall the king of bold face. Accounts of Antiochus’s demise differ, yet it was clear that he was not killed in battle or assassinated (cf. 1 Macc. 6:1–16; 2 Macc. 9:5–7).

8:26 Gabriel described the vision as “the vision of the evenings and the mornings,” a reference to the regular sacrifices made twice a day that ceased due to the intervention of Antiochus in Jerusalem. Even though the vision of verses 1–14 pertained to more than the persecution inflicted by the little horn, Gabriel’s calling it the vision of the evenings and the mornings highlighted the key point of what Daniel had seen. Daniel heard that the vision “is true.” As terrible as these prophecies must have sounded, Daniel needed to know they would unfold as predicted.

Daniel would not witness the bold king’s raging. Gabriel told him to “seal up the vision, for it refers to many days from now.” The main fulfillment of the vision—the years of the Greeks and the rise of the little horn—was several centuries in the future. Daniel saw the vision in approximately 548 BC, and Antiochus IV Epiphanes did not come to power until 175 BC. By sealing the writing, Daniel would preserve these prophecies for subsequent generations, especially for those who would endure the terrible persecution of the little horn.

8:27 The interpretation section began and ended with “I, Daniel” (vv. 15, 27). After Gabriel finished speaking, Daniel admitted to being “overcome” and “sick for some days.” This was not the first time Daniel experienced alarm at what he had seen in a vision (cf. 4:19; 7:15, 28), but 8:27 is the first report that Daniel was ill for a short period of time. When the sickness passed, Daniel “rose and went about the king’s business,” business that may have been reduced in scope due to his advancing age (he was probably in his seventies).

Daniel’s final words in the chapter were negative: “I was appalled by the vision and did not understand it.” The prophesied persecution of the saints was too much for him to take in, and many historical details remained unclear since most of the vision pertained to the distant future.