The Ten Horns
Sample from: Chapter 8
The Ram And The Goat
During the third year of the reign of King Belshazzar I Daniel, had another vision appear to me, after the one that appeared to me the first time. 2 And as I saw the vision it happened that I was in the palace at Shushan that is in the province of Elam. And I saw in the vision that I was by the River Ulai. 3 Then I raised my eyes and saw standing beside the river, a ram that had two horns. And the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last. 4 I saw the ram pushing westward, northward, and southward, so that no beasts could stand before him, neither was their any that could save from his hand. He did according to his will and became great.
5 And as I was considering this, suddenly a male goat came from the west, across the surface of the whole earth, not touching the ground. And this goat had a notable horn between his eyes. 6 And he came to the ram that had two horns, that I had seen standing beside the river, and ran to him with fury and power. 7 And I saw him coming close to the ram, and he was driven with rage against him. And he struck the ram and broke his two horns. The ram had no power to withstand him as he threw him down on the ground and trampled him, and there was no one that could save the ram from his hand.8 Therefore the male goat became very great, and while he was strong the great horn was broken, and in its place rose up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.
The great horn on the he goat represents Alexander the Great. He defeated Darius III in 330BC. Darius was the last king of the Achaemenid Empire of Medo/Persia, represented here by the ram with one horn higher than the other. Symbolizing the superior power of the Persians in that empire. After Alexander died his kingdom was divided between his four Generals.
- Lysimachus – Some of Asia Minor, Thrace, Bithynia, Pergamum.
- Cassander – Greece, Macedonia.
- Ptolemy – Egypt, Libya, Israel.
- Seleucus – Babylon, most of Persia, some of Asia and Syria.
9 And out of one of them came a little horn that became exceedingly great toward the south, toward the east, and toward the pleasant land. 10 And it became great even to the host of heaven. And it threw down some of the host and some of the stars to the ground, and trampled them. 11 Yes, he even exalted himself to the level of the prince of the host. And by him the daily sacrifice was stopped, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. 12 Because of transgression an army was given to him to oppose the daily sacrifice. And it cast truth down to the ground, and it practiced and prospered. 13 Then I heard a saint speaking, and another saint said to the one who was speaking, “How long shall the vision be concerning the daily sacrifice and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot?” 14 And he said to me, “Until two thousand and three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.”
1.Seleucus a.k.a Seleucus I Nicator) went on to establish the Seleucid Empire. His successors are listed below:
2. Antiochus I Soter. Founded the cult of his father. An inscription found in Ilion (a.k.a Troy) advises priests to sacrifice to Apollo, the ancestor of his family, whose symbols include a serpent.
3. Antiochus II Theos.
4. Seleucus II Callinicus.
5. Seleucus III Ceraunus.
6. Antiochus III the Great. His wife Laodice III was his paternal first cousin. They were the parents of Antiochus IV Epiphanes.
7. Seleucus IV Philopator. Inherited vast debts to Rome. He sent Heliodorus to raid the Jewish temple treasury. Heliodorus is the one referred to in chapter 11:20 as a “raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom”.
8. Antiochus IV Epiphanes. Had not been the next in line for the throne. He got there through plots and assassination. Most Bible scholars agree that this man fulfills the prophecy of verse nine (The little horn) who is seen as a prototype Antichrist.
In 175BC Heliodorus assassinated Seleucus IV Philopator and usurped the throne. He was later ousted by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. Whilst Seleucus legitimate heir – Demetrius I Soter was a hostage in Rome, Antiochus, with the help of King Eumenes II of Pergamum, seized the throne; proclaiming himself co-regent with another son of Seleucus, an infant also named Antiochus, whom he murdered a few years later.
Thus, Antiochus IV Epiphanes fulfilled the chapter 7:8 vision of a little horn that rose up amongst the ten, uprooting three before it.
The three horns he uprooted were:
Heliodorus,
Demetrius I Soter.
The infant Antiochus.
********************
Want to know more? Get the book:
Daniel’s Seal Broken. Antichrist’s Nephilim Origin Revealed
by Phil Mayo
danielsealbroken 
All Glory to God
Phil,
I saw your post on another blog. I had the urge to share with you what has been shown to me. Below is the 2nd fulfillment of Daniel 11 v 10-12. Note that I have number parts that match with the prophecy
Daniel 11 v 10-12
“But his sons shall be stirred up[1], and shall assemble a multitude of great forces: and one shall certainly come, and overflow, and pass through: then shall he return, and be stirred up, even to his fortress[2].
And the king of the south shall be moved with choler, and shall come forth and fight with him, even with the king of the north: and he shall set forth a great multitude[3]; but the multitude shall be given into his hand[4].
And when he hath taken away the multitude, his heart shall be lifted up; and he shall cast down many ten thousands[6]: BUT HE SHALL NOT BE STRENGTHENED BY IT[5]”. (KJV)
Ottoman-Persian War 1821-23 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman%E2%80%93Persian_War_%281821%E2%80%9323%29)
“Crown Prince Abbas Mirza of Persia, at the instigation of the Russian Empire[1], invaded Western Armenia and the areas surrounding Iranian Azerbaijan.The governor of Baghdad’s invasion of Persia is defeated by Mohammed Ali Mirza who then besieges Baghdad[2], his untimely death ends the siege. Meanwhile, Abbas Mirza marched into eastern Anatolia with 30,000 troops and met an Ottoman army of 50,000 at the Battle of Erzurum[3]. Abbas Mirza scored a crushing defeat over the Ottomans despite being severely outnumbered and his army suffering from a cholera epidemic[4].
Peace was not concluded until the Treaty of Erzurum two years later; BOTH SIDES RECOGNIZED PREVIOUS BORDERS, WITH NO TERRITORIAL CHANGES[5]”.
Note that Abbas Mirza and Mohammed Ali Mirza were both sons of the ruler of Persia at the time, Fath Ali Shah.
In 1826, Abbas Mirza, so encouraged by his military success at the Battle of Erzurum, decides to take on the Russians which, despite initial successes ends in disaster.
This is a second fulfillment of this prophecy. The first being in the days of the Grecian Empire of Alexander. We go on to Verse 13 of Daniel 11
“For the king of the north shall return, and shall set forth a multitude greater than the former, and shall certainly come AFTER CERTAIN YEARS with a great army and with much riches” (KJV)
“AFTER CERTAIN YEARS” there is a resurgence of Turkish and Iranian power. Note that after 1823 (the last war between the two) both empires go into terminal decline. Verse 13 is where the prophecy of Daniel 7 enters with the rise of the 3rd beast. Daniel 7 is about the resurgence of these powers on the road to the end of the age.
God Bless
Hi Curtis
Thanks for your input. Your historical research is something that will take me time to look into. The main problem I see for the moment is the third beast of Daniel Chapter 7 isn’t Greece. That Empire is given it’s representative beast as chapter 8’s goat.
All Glory to God
Phil,
You are right. The 3rd beast isn’t Greece, its Turkey. Remember Turkey (Asia Minor) was conquered by Alexander and was one of the 4 territories divided by his generals after his death. Turkey is the modern successor to the Grecian Empire.
God Bless
Hi Curtis.
No. Greece is what’s left of the Grecian Empire. In actual fact they merged into the Roman Empire, both in the past and present! Turks came from the east. They aren’t Greeks they are Asian.
This whole idea of the Antichrist originating in Turkey is based on the proposition that land mass defines the identity of the people. Can you give me a scriptural example of this? I know of plenty that confirm the name of a progenitor being given to the land, but not vice versa.
Curtis,
I’ve taken time to look at your historical research. You seem to be confusing The King Of The South with someone other than those with a geographical location south of Israel. I know of no scriptural justification for doing this. Your research appears to support my view, that the King Of The North in the latter days refers to Gog from the utmost north, (Ezekiel 38:15) commonly believed to be of the Russian block.
Hi Phil,
Thanks for looking into my ideas. You bring up an excellent point about the King of the South.
Consider Daniel 8 v 19-21
” And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be IN THE LAST END of the indignation: for at the time appointed THE END shall be.
The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king”.
Note that the Angel makes it clear he’s speaking about the end-times. This verse tells that the end time clash is between the modern successor to the Persian empire and the modern successor to the Grecian empire.
This point is further emphasized in Daniel 7 where the Persians re-emerge first and then the Grecian Empire. We also from Daniel 11 that the anti-Christ emerges from the modern successor to the Grecian Empire (he is called the King of the North).
Note that Iran ruled Bahrain as part of its empire for much of the 1800. Bahrain is to the south of Israel.
God Bless
Hi Curtis.
What is being spoken of has to be considered from an unfolding of time perspective. This is the case with many prophecies that have a near and far time fulfilment.
You are obviously very much in the Joel Richardson camp when it comes to geographical locations. He would have us believe Mecca is a coastal city when it is nothing of the sort. You are telling me Bahrain is south of Israel. I’ve been there. And it is South-East of Israel. A very long way east! There is no king of the South-East!
Antiochus IV was of Greek heritage. He came from Rome, were he had been held hostage to fulfil his prophetic roll as the Antichrist prototype.
All Glory to God
Phil,
I believe Daniel 7 & 8 to be infused into Daniel 11. I have shown in the previous comment that there is 2nd fulfillment of Daniel 11 v 10-12. This is in the story of Fath Ali Shah (ruler of Qajar Iranian empire) vs the Ottoman empire. I give praise to God as I believe I received it from Him. The 3rd signpost begins in Daniel 11v13 with the return of the King of the North (Turkey). I use Mark Davidson’s signpost terminology… I believe Daniel 7 to be a road-map for the end of the age
Daniel 8 is of significance because Antiochus IV Epiphanes is a foreshadow of the anti-Christ. This can also be combined with Daniel 7 and 11. I’ll tell you how
Using Antiochus IV Epiphanes as a model, we can get an insight into how the anti-Christ comes to power. Antiochus IV is the son of Antiochus III the great. Antiochus III engineers a resurgence of the Seleucid Empire (after a period of decline), winning many battles and much territory (Antiochus III has the ambition of restoring Alexander the great’s empire) but it all ends in disaster courtesy of the Romans (this is prophesied in Daniel 11v 13-17). I believe the 2nd fulfillment of this to be Mr Erdogan (we will see).
Seleucus IV succeeds Antiochus III but he is overthrown by a usurper named Heliodorus. Antiochus IV takes the throne by ousting Heliodorus (with help from King Eumenes II of Pergamum) and murdering Seleucus IV’s other son while Seleucus’ true heir is held hostage in Rome. Antiochus IV is the 4th ruler from Antiochus III the great who revived the Seleucid Empire. This corresponds with the 4 heads of the leopard in Daniel 7. The anti-Christ will be the 4th leader of Turkey from Mr Erdogan (if my hunch is correct) who has led a revival Turkish imperial ambitions in the Middle-East after a period of decline.
Likewise I believe the 3 ribs of the bear represent 3 leaders who will lead Iran during the time of the 2nd signpost (the rise of Iran), this is after the fall of Saddam Hussein in the first signpost . These leaders, I believe, are Khatami, Ahmadinejad and now Rouhani. During the days of Mr Rouhani, the 3rd signpost will begin (or may have already begun) with the rise of Turkey. One of the major events in the rise of Turkey will be, I believe, a Turkish invasion of Syria (Daniel 11v15 and Jeremiah 49v23).
Note that since the fall of Babylon in about 500BC, no power has arisen from Babylon’s historical territory to challenge for dominance in the Middle East until Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.
God Bless
Curtis.
Thanks again for your input. But I can only say the same again regarding your view of which empires are represented by Daniel’s chapter 7 beasts. If the foundational understanding is wrong, the whole eschatological picture goes out of focus. This isn’t your fault. It isn’t even the fault of Joel Richardson and Co. It’s due to sloppy work done by theologians like Gill etc. That work became writing in stone that very few if any, made an effort to check out.
All Glory to God
Phil,
I forgot to add that Iran is currently running Gaza by proxy. Gaza is to the south of Israel
God Bless
Hi Curtis.
No. Gaza is on Israel’s west.
Phil,
Thanks for engaging with me. I always enjoy a debate. I profoundly disagree with Mr Richardson on the central part of his thesis. I do believe that land mass defines the identity of the people. remember this vision was for Daniel, he would not have been familiar with the name Turkey. Populations in ancient times were often on the move. For instance the current population of Iran consists of more than just Persians
I have pointed you to Daniel 8 which fixes the successors to the Grecian empire and the Persian empire as end-time combatants
Consider Daniel 8 v 19-21
”And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be IN THE LAST END of the indignation: for at the time appointed THE END shall be.
The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia”.
We know Antiochus is the shadow of the anti-Christ. Antiochus was the ruler of Asia-Minor (modern day Turkey).
You say Bahrain is SOUTH-east of Israel. Still sounds like south to me
I have looked at the maps the Gaza strip IS south of Irael just as Egypt is south of Israel. You wouldn’t say Egypt is west of Israel would you?
God Bless
Curtis.
Like Joel Richardson, you are confusing the characters mentioned in Daniel 11. The king of the north isn’t the Antichrist
I have quoted the passage below, inserting (A/C) for Antichrist to clarify who is being spoken of.
Verse 40-45 says: “At the time of the end the king of the South shall attack him (A/C); and the king of the North shall charge at him (A/C) like a storm, with chariots, horsemen, and many ships. And he (A/C) will invade the countries, sweeping through them like a flood. 41 He (A/C) shall also enter the glorious land, and many countries will fall. But Edom, Moab, and most of the people of Ammon shall escape him (A/C). 42 He (A/C) will stretch out his (A/C) influence against the countries, and Egypt shall not escape. 43 He (A/C) will take control of the treasures of gold and silver, and all the precious things of Egypt. The Libyans and Ethiopians will follow in his (A/C) footsteps. 44 But rumours from the east and the north shall disturb him (A/C); therefore he (A/C) will charge out with great fury to destroy and annihilate. 45 And he (A/C) will pitch his (A/C) royal tents between the seas and the glorious holy mountain. But he (A/C) shall come to his (A/C) end, and nobody will help him (A/C.”
You must have noticed the three points of the compass mentioned are North, South and East. The compass point not mentioned is West. That’s because the narrative clearly implies the Antichrist is the king of the West.
If you use this benchmark scripture as your starting point, you will see the error in the Middle East Beast thesis.
All Glory to God,
Thanks again for engaging with me Phil. If you examine Daniel 11 starting from Verse 15 to 21 you will see that AC does become King of the North
For sake of brevity I will put down only verses 15 & 21…you can check out the rest yourself.
Daniel 11 v 15-21
“So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities: and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither shall there be any strength to withstand…And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries”.(KJV)
AC becoming King of the North is the opening of the first seal in Revelations 6 IMO. AC, however, does not remain as ruler of Turkey as you have pointed to in your comment. It is my belief that he moves on to become head of an international organization with global power akin to but superseding that of the UN. This organization is the beast
Consider Daniel 11 v 23
“And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: FOR HE SHALL COME UP, AND SHALL BECOME STRONG WITH A SMALL PEOPLE”.
We can discuss other parts of my theory as we go on.
God Bless
Curtis.
I pointed to Daniel 11:40-45 as a benchmark scripture. Now you can fire back with other scriptures that you believe support your point of view, but that isn’t going to get us to the facts. It’s only going to bat the ball back and forth until one of us gets fed up.
So lets deal with the benchmark and see if it supports your view or not…
Firstly, do you agree that the three points of the compass mentioned in Daniel 11 are directions from which the Antichrist is being attacked, and to which he is attacking? If you agree, how do you explain him being attacked by the king of the north if he is that king?
Joel Richardson seems to believe this Antichrist king of the north is Gog. Do you subscribe to that view? If you do, how do you reconcile the different outcome of Gog’s attack (recorded in Ezekiel) to that of the Antichrist’s recorded here?
Phil,
I give you my beliefs in its entirety and then tell me what you think. I believe that AC becomes King of the North (Verse 21) which is also the opening of the 1st seal in Rev 6. This is followed by the 2nd war (World War 3) in Verse 22 and the opening of the 2nd seal. AC plays a big role in bringing peace to the world and invading armies are demobilized…” And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken…”.
This is followed by the creation of the beast system which has the world divided into ten regional bodies based around the idea of the EU (shared sovereignty), the EU is one of the ten. These ten will form the security council of a new UN type body with AC as its head. AC moves from being King of the North to be the head of this body (the beast). This is the only way you can reconcile Daniel 11 v 15-21 and Daniel 11 v 40-45 IMO. Note Verse 23…”And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with A SMALL PEOPLE”. Note the reference to “a small people”…this is clearly not a nation otherwise the Angel would have said so, this is an organization. The 70th week begins in Verse 23 as the league is signed here.
I do not believe AC is Gog but he(AC) is a foreshadow of him in that they both attack Israel. Gog appears at the end of the thousand year rule of our Lord. I have more that we can discuss later.
God Bless
Curtis.
There is no point in discussing how you think things will pan out if you aren’t looking at things from a sound scriptural point of view. I gave you my understanding of what Daniel 11:40-45 actually says. If I am right, the Antichrist can’t be from where you say. And that means your entire thesis is wrong. Equally if the Antichrist isn’t from where I say, my thesis will be wrong. So lets deal with that benchmark issue before we consider anything else.
Phil,
I am looking at it from a scriptural position. I believe we have to take the entire scriptural evidence we are provided with, not just a piece of it. The story of AC’s career starts in Verse 21 as King of the North.
In Verse 36, AC becomes King again…this time not of the North but of the world.
Consider Daniel 11 v 36
“AND THE KING shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper TILL INDIGNATION BE ACCOMPLISHED: for that that is determined shall be done” (KJV)
This is corroborated by Revelations 17 v 16-17
“And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.
For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, UNTIL THE WORDS OF GOD BE FULFILLED”.
The ten kingdoms give their kingdom to AC. I have simply crafted a scenario that I think takes into account all the evidence about AC in the scriptures.
We also that AC is a mirror of Antiochus Epiphanes who was king of the North (Asia Minor/Turkey). Plus AC is called the Assyrian in Isaiah 10 and Micah 5. Eastern Turkey was part of the ancient Assyrian Empire.
What is described in Daniel 11 v 40-45 is what happens after AC has become the defacto King of the World in Verse 36 (same as in Rev 17 v 17). This same battle in Dan 11 v 40-45 is described in Isaiah 10 where AC is called the Assyrian.
God Bless
Curtis.
I have tried to get you to either see the fact that Daniel 11:40-45 proves that the Antichrist isn’t the king of the North, or explain why the passage doesn’t mean what it says in plain English.
In order for there to be any point to a debate on this subject, there has to be mutual agreement on what scripture is saying.
We might think we have some marvellous revelation, but if it’s refuted by scripture, we have nothing.
I won’t continue this debate.
God Bless
Phil,
I think you are not reading my replies correctly. I agree with you that the beast organization itself is not Middle-East centric. I simply put to you that though Daniel 11 v 40-45 says that AC isn’t the king of the North at that time…Daniel 11 v 15-21 says he is at a certain time.
The only way to reconcile these 2 positions is that AC at some point moves from being King of North to another organization. I believe Daniel 11 v 23 is where this transition occurs.
I have also provided other scriptures to show you that AC is the king of the North for a while (Isaiah 10 and Micah 5) and he is someone who the geographical area of where the ancient Assyrian empire (Isaiah 10 & Micah 5) and the Roman Empire (Dan 9v26) overlap. I will present to you another piece of scriptural evidence.
Zechariah 6 v 6 & 8
“The black horses which are therein go forth into the north country; and the WHITE go forth after them; and the grisled go forth toward the south country.
Then cried he upon me, and spake unto me, saying, Behold, these that GO TOWARD THE NORTH COUNTRY have quieted my spirit in the NORTH COUNTRY”.(KJV)
Remember the white horse and it’s rider in Revelations 6? the white horse is symbol of authority over the nations. This scripture is telling us that it(the white horse) has been assigned by God to the kingdom of the North and consequently a chosen leader (the false Christ) of that Kingdom. Later on that horse (and the authority) is taken from that individual and assigned to our Lord (the true Christ) in Revelations 19 v 11.
I hope you consider these things in your spare and if you have a better that takes into account all the scriptural evidence, I would glad to receive it. Thanks for engaging with me.
God Bless
Curtis,
Read the full passage right to the end. You can’t fail to see the Antichrist is always implied as being the king of the West. The passage maps out a period of prophetic history that includes him being attacked by the king of the North, so he can’t also be that character. It finishes with that same western Antichrist meeting his end. “But he (A/C) shall come to his end, and nobody will help him.”
There is no amount of other scriptures you can quote that will change what is being described in Daniel 11:40-45. So if you find something that leads you to the conclusion the Antichrist is anyone other than the king of the West. Simply assume you have misunderstood it, because scripture doesn’t contradict itself.
All Glory to God
Phil,
This is my last comment on this particular topic. Again…I say I agree with you that Daniel 11 v 40-45 is clear that AC is not the king of the North AT THAT TIME. You have to take the entire scriptural evidence into consideration not just a part of it.
I have presented to you multiple scriptures that show AC as the King of North at a particular time (Daniel 11 v 15-21) but it appears you are determined to ignore all these.
My position is that AC starts off as King of North but moves on from there to become King of the World (or at least a large chunk of the world). This is corroborated in Daniel 7 and 11, Revelations 6 and 17 etc. This is the only way you can fit all these scriptures including Daniel 11 v 40-45. Saying that AC is King of the West only is in direct conflict with multiple scriptures IMO. AC has been given authority to take control of the world.
Consider Revelations 6 v 1
“And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and A CROWN WAS GIVEN UNTO HIM: AND HE WENT FORTH CONQUERING, AND TO CONQUER”.
I believe that towards the end of AC’s 42 month reign as King of the World, many parts of the world will rebel against him and wars will erupt. This is what we see in Daniel 11 v 40-45. The AC rule ends with war…first with some nations of the world and then finally with our Lord and His saints
Consider Daniel 9 v 26
“And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and AND UNTO THE END OF THE WAR desolations are determined”.(KJV)
God Bless
Curtis,
Your thesis is wrong because you are reading the prophesied exploits of Antiochus’ father as though they were that of the future Antichrist. They are not! They had their time of fulfilment during the Seleucid/Ptolemaic wars. Did you read my e-book that I sent you? It has a full explanation of this.
Daniel 11:40-45 doesn’t allow for your thesis because, #1 It clearly implies the Antichrist is from the West. #2 It describes the Antichrist battling the King of the North. #3 That same Western Antichrist meets his end without any transition to king of the world being spoken of.
As I have repeatedly said: your use of other scriptures are a futile attempt to contradict what is clear from the grammatically correct reading of Dan 11:40-45. When you have something as clear as this, it is the basis on which to build a thesis. Not begin with a conclusion, then go back and try to force fit scripture to support it, as is done with the Beast From The East hogwash.