Prophecy
Prophecy explorer
Researched prophetic records
The four kingdoms and the everlasting kingdom (Dan 2:36–45)
Daniel 2:36–45 · Nebuchadnezzar's dream and Daniel's interpretation (Dan 2:1–45)
Daniel's interpretation: Nebuchadnezzar is the head of gold; three further kingdoms follow, the fourth strong as iron and later divided; in the days of those kings God sets up an everlasting kingdom that breaks the others.
Identified in the text: Only the first kingdom is identified in the text (Nebuchadnezzar / Babylon). The second, third and fourth kingdoms and the stone are not named in Daniel 2.
Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome; the stone is the messianic kingdom
HistoricistTraditional Jewish and ChristianMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
The metals are a historical succession ending with Rome; God's kingdom (the Messiah's) replaces the world empires. Josephus already reads the bronze as a power "from the west" and the iron as a dominion over all the earth.
Proponents: Josephus (iron as a world-ruling power; declines to explain the stone); Jerome; Talmud and medieval Jewish commentators incl. Rashi; Calvin and Reformation-era writers · Sources: Antiquities of the Jews, Book X, chapter 10, §4 (trans. William Whiston); Four kingdoms of Daniel — Wikipedia
Rome with a future ten-kingdom phase; the stone is Christ's return
FuturistDispensational premillennialMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
The fourth kingdom is Rome; the ten toes correspond to a future revived Roman confederation (cf. 7:24; Rev 17:12), not yet realised; the stone is the Messiah, whose return decisively ends the world kingdoms.
Proponents: D. Guzik (Enduring Word); Dispensational interpreters (per Wikipedia) · Sources: Daniel 2 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; Four kingdoms of Daniel — Wikipedia
Rome followed by the divided nations of Europe; the stone is God's unending kingdom at Christ's return
HistoricistSeventh-day Adventist historicismMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
A continuous fulfilment through history from Babylon to Rome and its divided successors, culminating in God's kingdom.
Proponents: Seventh-day Adventist interpretation (per Wikipedia) · Sources: Four kingdoms of Daniel — Wikipedia
Babylon, Media, Persia, Greece (Seleucids and Ptolemies); the stone is God's imminent kingdom
PreteristHistorical-criticalMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Following Daniel's own sequence of Median and Persian rulers (5:31; 6:28), the four kingdoms are Babylon, Media, Persia and the Hellenistic kingdoms; the mixed iron and clay reflects Seleucid–Ptolemaic marriage alliances (c. 250 or 193 BC); the chapter in its present form dates from the early Seleucid period at the earliest. Driver (1900) holds this view and records that God's kingdom was expected to follow immediately on the fourth empire's overthrow in Antiochus Epiphanes (Introduction p. lxxxvii).
Proponents: S. R. Driver (1900): Introduction pp. x–xi ("in all probability the Median, Persian, and Greek"); Additional Note pp. 98–102 (this "Grecian" view first in Ephrem Syrus, then Ewald, Bleek, Delitzsch, Kuenen, Bevan); Modern critical consensus, e.g. J. J. Collins (per Wikipedia); Porphyry (3rd c. AD); Ephrem the Syrian; Polychronius; Cosmas Indicopleustes · Sources: Daniel 2 — Wikipedia; Four kingdoms of Daniel — Wikipedia; Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Hermeneia); The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges)
The decree of the watchers against the king (Dan 4:19–27)
Daniel 4:19–27 · Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the great tree and Daniel's interpretation (Dan 4:4–27)
Daniel interprets the tree as the king, who will be driven from human society to live like an animal for seven times until he acknowledges the Most High, after which his kingdom is restored; he urges repentance.
Identified in the text: The text identifies the tree as Nebuchadnezzar and narrates its fulfilment within the chapter (4:28–33).
Fulfilled in Nebuchadnezzar's seven-year madness
PreteristTraditional Jewish and ChristianMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
The decree was fulfilled in the king's own humbling for seven years (as the Old Greek renders it) and his restoration.
Proponents: The narrative itself (4:28–33); D. Guzik (seven times = seven years) · Sources: Daniel 4 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Originally about Nabonidus
PreteristHistorical-critical
The tale is a variant of a tradition about Nabonidus's affliction and his long stay at Tayma (cf. 4Q242), transferred to the better-known Nebuchadnezzar. This is a source-critical view, not a fulfillment claim.
Proponents: J. J. Collins (1984), via Wikipedia; W. von Soden; Livius.org · Sources: Daniel 4 — Wikipedia; Prayer of Nabonidus — Wikipedia; Daniel on Nebuchadnezzar's madness — Livius.org
MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN (Dan 5:24–28)
Writing on the palace wall which Daniel reads as: God has numbered the kingdom and ended it; the king is weighed and found wanting; the kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians.
Identified in the text: Daniel's reading (5:26–28) and the narrated sequel that night (5:30–31).
Fulfilled that night in the fall of Babylon
PreteristTraditional Jewish and ChristianMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
The kingdom of Belshazzar ended when Babylon passed to Cyrus in October 539 BC.
Proponents: The narrative itself (5:30–31); D. Guzik · Sources: Daniel 5 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Weights and wordplay
PreteristPhilological
As nouns the words name weights — a mina, a shekel and half-pieces — which Daniel reinterprets as verbs; parsîn also puns on "Persia". If the half-pieces are two half-shekels the total is 62 shekels, the age given for Darius the Mede. This is a reading of the words, not a fulfillment claim.
Proponents: C.-L. Seow (2003), via Wikipedia · Sources: Belshazzar's feast — Wikipedia
The heavenly judgment and the kingdom given to the saints (Dan 7:9–12, 18, 21–22, 26–27)
Daniel 7:9–27 · Daniel's night vision of the four beasts and its interpretation (Dan 7)
The Ancient of Days holds court, the beast's dominion is taken away, and the kingdom is given to the people of the saints of the Most High forever.
Identified in the text: The judgment ends the horn's dominion (7:26) and gives the kingdom to the saints (7:22, 27). The Ancient of Days is not further identified.
The Ancient of Days is God; a final judgment at the end of the age
FuturistTraditional Christian (amillennial in Jerome)
Jerome reads the court as the last judgment and the kingdom as heavenly ("Away, then, with the fable about a millennium"); Guzik reads a future earthly kingdom received at Jesus' return. The two traditional readings disagree about the kingdom's nature.
Proponents: Jerome; D. Guzik (God the Father; kingdom on the millennial earth at Jesus' return) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 7; Daniel 7 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
God's judgment on Antiochus and the expected kingdom of faithful Israel
PreteristHistorical-critical
The author expected God's kingdom to follow immediately on the fall of Antiochus (cf. 12:1–3); the expectation was not realised as described. Not a claim of fulfillment.
Proponents: S. R. Driver (1900) · Sources: The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges)
The papal dominion taken away by degrees
HistoricistProtestant historicistMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
After the 1260 years the dominion of the little horn is consumed "not at once, but by degrees", and the kingdom passes by degrees to the saints.
Proponents: I. Newton (1733) · Sources: Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John
Later reuse: "Head of Days" in Enoch; the risen Christ with hair like wool (Rev 1:14)
MixedReception history
Enoch renames the Ancient of Days the "Head of Days"; Revelation transfers the white wool and snow of the Ancient of Days to the "one like a son of man". Recorded as reception, not as a fulfillment.
Proponents: 1 Enoch 46; Revelation 1:13–14 (text) · Sources: The Book of Enoch (trans. R. H. Charles, SPCK 1917)
One like a son of man receives an everlasting dominion (Dan 7:13–14)
Daniel 7:13–14 · Daniel's night vision of the four beasts and its interpretation (Dan 7)
A human-like figure comes with the clouds of heaven to the Ancient of Days and receives a kingdom that all peoples will serve and that will never be destroyed.
Identified in the text: The figure is not explicitly identified. In the interpretation the everlasting kingdom is given to "the saints of the Most High" / "the people of the saints of the Most High" (7:18, 22, 27).
Jesus as the Son of Man (Christian messianic)
MixedTraditional ChristianMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: Jesus' self-designation "the Son of Man … coming with the clouds" (Mark 14:62) cites Dan 7:13; Revelation 1:13 describes the risen Christ as "one like a son of man". Objections (Driver): the chapter's own interpretation applies the kingdom to the saints, not to an individual. Acceptance: Montgomery calls the personal messianic view the eldest and formerly prevailing one; the historicity of individual Gospel sayings was not researched here.
Proponents: Gospel tradition: Jesus' reply at his trial (Mark 14:62; Matt 26:64); Jerome; D. Guzik · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 7; Daniel 7 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (ICC)
An individual Messiah (Second Temple and rabbinic Jewish)
FuturistJewish messianic
Enoch's Son of Man stands beside the "Head of Days" and judges kings; 2 Esdras 13 has a man rising from the sea and flying with the clouds; the Talmud reads Dan 7:13 as the Messiah's coming if Israel is worthy, and Akiva read the thrones as one for God and one for David (disputed by R. Yose). Not a claim of historical fulfillment.
Proponents: 1 Enoch 46 (Similitudes); 2 Esdras 13; b. Sanhedrin 98a (R. Alexandri for R. Joshua b. Levi); b. Sanhedrin 38b (R. Akiva) · Sources: The Book of Enoch (trans. R. H. Charles, SPCK 1917); World English Bible — Apocrypha/Deuterocanon (1 Maccabees; 2 Esdras); Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 38b and 98a (William Davidson Edition) — Sefaria; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges)
A symbol of the people of the saints (collective)
PreteristHistorical-critical (also ancient)
As the beasts stand for kingdoms, the human figure stands for the ideal Israel to whom 7:18, 22 and 27 give the same everlasting kingdom; human form contrasts with bestial empires, the clouds mark God's action. Montgomery calls this "itself an ancient view". Objection: the figure is distinguished from the saints and approaches God like an individual (traditional readers).
Proponents: S. R. Driver (1900); J. A. Montgomery (1927); A. A. Bevan (via Driver) · Sources: The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (ICC)
An angelic leader (Michael)
PreteristHistorical-critical
The figure is the angelic prince of Israel (cf. Michael in 10:13, 21; 12:1), and "the holy ones" may be angels. Wikipedia calls this "the main alternative view"; known here only at second hand.
Proponents: J. J. Collins (1998, pp. 101–103), via Wikipedia — not read directly · Sources: Daniel 7 — Wikipedia
The ten horns and the little horn: time, times and half a time (Dan 7:8, 20–26)
Daniel 7:20–26 · Daniel's night vision of the four beasts and its interpretation (Dan 7)
Ten kings arise from the fourth kingdom; another king subdues three, blasphemes, persecutes the saints and attempts to change times and law for a time, times and half a time, until the judgment removes his dominion.
Identified in the text: Horns = kings (7:24). The duration is "a time and times and half a time" (7:25). No king is named.
Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Seleucid kings
PreteristHistorical-critical (also Porphyry)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
The ten horns are Seleucid kings (several reconstructions; the three uprooted are e.g. Heliodorus, Demetrius and Ptolemy VI, or alternatives); the little horn is Antiochus IV, whose suppression of Temple worship (1 Macc 1:41–64) lasted about three and a half years. Objections: the identity and number of the ten and the three are uncertain (Driver concedes "our knowledge … does not … enable us to decide"); Jerome objects that Porphyry's three kings do not fit; conservative readers object that the everlasting kingdom did not follow Antiochus's death.
Proponents: Porphyry (via Jerome); Delitzsch, Ewald, Bevan (via Driver); S. R. Driver (1900); A.-J. Levine (2010), via Wikipedia · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 7; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); World English Bible — Apocrypha/Deuterocanon (1 Maccabees; 2 Esdras); Daniel 7 — Wikipedia
A future Antichrist from a ten-fold division of the Roman world
FuturistPatristic; later dispensational/premillennial
At the end of the age ten kings partition the Roman world; an eleventh overthrows three and persecutes the saints for three and a half literal years before Christ's return (Jerome; Guzik links Rev 11–13). Objection (Driver): the kingdoms must arise from the fourth empire, which no longer exists. Not a claim of historical fulfillment.
Proponents: Hippolytus (via Driver); Jerome; D. Guzik (restored Roman empire) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 7; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); Daniel 7 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
The papacy (historicist)
HistoricistProtestant historicistMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
The ten horns are the kingdoms into which the Western Empire broke; the little horn is the Church of Rome as a temporal power, which subdued three of them; "time, times and half a time" is 1260 years on a day-for-a-year reckoning (Newton). Objection (Driver): the scheme is "non-natural" and depends on choosing ten kingdoms and a starting date.
Proponents: I. Newton (1733); W. H. Rule (1869), via Driver; Seventh-day Adventist interpretation (noted by Guzik) · Sources: Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); Daniel 7 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Julius Caesar and the Caesars
PreteristReformationMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
The little horn is the line of Roman Caesars beginning with Julius Caesar. Recorded as reported by Enduring Word, which rejects it.
Proponents: J. Calvin (as reported by Guzik; not read directly) · Sources: Daniel 7 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
The four kingdoms and the kingdom of the saints (Dan 7:17–18, 23, 27)
Daniel 7:17–27 · Daniel's night vision of the four beasts and its interpretation (Dan 7)
Four beasts are four kings/kingdoms; the fourth differs from the rest; afterwards the saints of the Most High receive an everlasting kingdom.
Identified in the text: Four kings (7:17); the fourth beast a fourth kingdom (7:23). The text names none of the kingdoms; Daniel 2:38 identifies the first kingdom of the parallel dream with Nebuchadnezzar.
Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome ("Roman" scheme)
MixedTraditional Christian (patristic); also later Jewish authoritiesMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the parallel with the four-metal statue of ch. 2; Medes and Persians as one kingdom (cf. 8:20); Rome as the iron power that crushed all. Objection (Driver 1900): no ten kingdoms arise out of Rome, which has passed away, and the little horn of ch. 7 matches the Antiochus horn of ch. 8. Acceptance: general among the Church Fathers (Driver); held today mainly in conservative interpretation (not quantified in sources read).
Proponents: 2 Esdras 12:11–12 (late 1st century AD); Hippolytus (via Driver); Jerome; Keil, Hengstenberg, Pusey (via Driver); I. Newton (1733); D. Guzik · Sources: World English Bible — Apocrypha/Deuterocanon (1 Maccabees; 2 Esdras); Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 7; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John; Daniel 7 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Babylon, Media, Persia, Greece ("Grecian" scheme)
PreteristHistorical-criticalMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: Daniel presents a separate Median kingdom (Darius the Mede, 5:31; 9:1) before Persia; the little horn here matches that of ch. 8 (Antiochus), whose persecution lasts the same "time, times and half a time" (cf. 12:7); the book's horizon ends with Antiochus. Objection: no independent Median empire ruled Babylon between Nabonidus and Cyrus (ABC 7); the bear/three ribs fit Medo-Persia (Driver concedes as plausible). Acceptance: the standard critical reading (Driver 1900; Levine via Wikipedia); a precise modern percentage was not found.
Proponents: Ephrem Syrus (via Driver); Ewald, Bleek, Delitzsch, Kuenen, Bevan (via Driver); S. R. Driver (1900); A.-J. Levine (2010), via Wikipedia · Sources: The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); Daniel 7 — Wikipedia
Porphyry: the leopard is Alexander, the fourth beast his successors
PreteristAnti-Christian philosophical critique (3rd century AD), known through JeromeMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Porphyry merged the Macedonian and Roman beasts into one Macedonian realm, made the fourth beast the successors of Alexander and counted ten cruel kings up to Antiochus Epiphanes. Jerome rejected this. Porphyry's own work survives only in such quotations.
Proponents: Porphyry (via Jerome) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 7
The ram, the goat and the four kingdoms (Dan 8:3–8, 20–22)
Daniel 8:20–22 · Daniel's vision of the ram and the goat at Susa (Dan 8)
The kings of Media and Persia are overthrown by the king of Greece, whose first king is broken and replaced by four kingdoms of lesser power.
Identified in the text: Explicit: ram = the kings of Media and Persia; goat = the king of Greece; great horn = the first king; four horns = four kingdoms from his nation (8:20–22).
Alexander the Great and his successors
PreteristCommon to traditional and critical interpretersMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the text itself names Media, Persia and Greece; Alexander, the first Macedonian king of Asia, defeated Darius III (Arbela, 331 BC) and died young; his empire passed to successors. Objections/variants: the four are listed differently — Jerome: Ptolemy, Philip Arrhidaeus, Seleucus, Antigonus; Guzik: Cassander, Lysimachus, Seleucus, Ptolemy (the coalition against Antigonus, Diodorus 20.106). Acceptance: no dissent found among the sources consulted on the identification of the great horn with Alexander.
Proponents: Josephus (Ant. 11.8.5, Alexander told he was meant); Jerome; S. R. Driver (1900); D. Guzik · Sources: Josephus, Antiquities 11.8.5 (trans. W. Whiston); Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 8; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); Daniel 8 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; Arrian, Anabasis of Alexander (trans. E. J. Chinnock, 1884); Diodorus Siculus, Library 20.106 (Loeb vol. X, 1954) — LacusCurtius
The little horn and the king of fierce face (Dan 8:9–12, 23–25)
Daniel 8:23–25 · Daniel's vision of the ram and the goat at Susa (Dan 8)
From one of the four kingdoms a fierce, cunning king arises who destroys the holy people, removes the continual offering, opposes the prince of princes, and is broken without human hand.
Identified in the text: The little horn is a king arising "in the latter time of their kingdom" (8:23) — i.e. of the four kingdoms of Greece. He is not named.
Antiochus IV Epiphanes
PreteristAncient Jewish, patristic and criticalMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the horn comes from one of the four Greek kingdoms; it removes the continual offering and desolates the sanctuary, which 1 Maccabees records under Antiochus (1:54) until the rededication (4:52). Objection (Newton): a horn signifies a kingdom, not one man, and Antiochus's kingdom was not "exceedingly great". Acceptance: Driver says it is "admitted on all hands"; even Jerome, who resists Antiochus for ch. 7, accepts him here.
Proponents: Josephus (Ant. 12.7.6: the desolation "according to the prophecy of Daniel"); Jerome (on 8:23); S. R. Driver (1900): "admitted on all hands"; J. A. Montgomery (1927); D. Guzik (near fulfillment) · Sources: Josephus, Antiquities 12.7.6–7 (trans. W. Whiston); Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 8; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (ICC); Daniel 8 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; World English Bible — Apocrypha/Deuterocanon (1 Maccabees; 2 Esdras)
Antiochus as a type of the future Antichrist (dual fulfillment)
MixedPatristic majority (per Jerome); modern dispensational
Because the vision concerns "the time of the end" (8:17, 19), the near fulfillment in Antiochus prefigures a final Antichrist. The future part is not a claim of historical fulfillment; the Antiochus part is recorded separately.
Proponents: "Most of our commentators" (reported by Jerome); D. Guzik · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 8; Daniel 8 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Rome (historicist)
HistoricistProtestant historicistMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
The little horn of the goat is a new kingdom that arose out of one of the four — Rome, which conquered Macedonia and the East and later continued as the Greek empire. Newton rejects Antiochus "not very judiciously" identified. Objection (Driver): the horn grows "out of one of them", i.e. from a Greek kingdom, and its deeds match Antiochus's.
Proponents: I. Newton (1733) · Sources: Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges)
2,300 evenings and mornings until the sanctuary is cleansed (Dan 8:13–14, 26)
Daniel 8:13–14 · Daniel's vision of the ram and the goat at Susa (Dan 8)
The desolation of the sanctuary and suspension of the continual offering will last 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be cleansed.
Identified in the text: The text gives the number and says the vision is "true" and for "many days to come" (8:26); it does not say whether the unit is a day or a single offering.
1,150 days (2,300 offerings) of the interrupted sacrifice under Antiochus
PreteristHistorical-criticalMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
The continual offering was made morning and evening, so 2,300 offerings = 1,150 days, a little under the 3 years 10 days between the desecration (15 Chislev 145) and the rededication (25 Chislev 148). Objection (Driver himself): the figure does "not agree precisely with the event".
Proponents: S. R. Driver (1900): "so most commentators"; P. Newell (cited by Guzik) · Sources: The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); Daniel 8 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; World English Bible — Apocrypha/Deuterocanon (1 Maccabees; 2 Esdras)
2,300 days ending with the cleansing of the Temple
PreteristPatristic and modern conservativeMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Evening-morning = a full day (cf. Gen 1:5), so 2,300 days ≈ 6⅓ years ending with Judas Maccabaeus's rededication. The starting point differs between proponents; Driver lists further variants (e.g. Dec 168 to the defeat of Nicanor, 161).
Proponents: Jerome (six years and three months from year 143); D. Guzik (from 171 BC, Menelaus's high priesthood, to the cleansing) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 8; Daniel 8 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges)
2,300 years from 457 BC to AD 1843 (year-day)
HistoricistMillerite (19th-century American Adventism)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
A prophetic day equals a year; the period begins with Artaxerxes' decree to Ezra (457 BC, the start of the seventy weeks of Dan 9) and ends in AD 1843 with the cleansing of the sanctuary at Christ's return. Objection (Guzik): Daniel's vision concerns Antiochus and the Temple cleansing commemorated in John 10:22; Miller's reckoning is rejected. Later Adventist reinterpretations (1844) were not researched from primary sources.
Proponents: W. Miller (1842) · Sources: Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ, about the Year 1843; Daniel 8 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Jeremiah's seventy years (Jer 25:11–12; 29:10; read in Dan 9:2)
The nations will serve the king of Babylon seventy years; when they are completed Babylon will be punished (Jer 25:11–12) and the exiles visited and returned (29:10). Daniel reads it as seventy years "for the desolations of Jerusalem" (Dan 9:2).
Identified in the text: Later biblical texts apply it differently: 2 Chr 36:21–22 to the land's sabbath rest until the kingdom of Persia and Cyrus's first year; Zech 1:12 (Darius's second year) to "these seventy years" of indignation against Jerusalem; Dan 9:24 extends it to seventy weeks.
Babylonian supremacy: c. 609/605 to 539/538 BC
PreteristHistorical-critical and conservativeMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: Jer 25:11 speaks of the nations serving the king of Babylon; 25:12 ends the period with Babylon's punishment. Historical evidence: Babylon fell in Oct 539 (Nabonidus Chronicle) and Cyrus's first Babylonian year began Nisan 538. Objection: 605–539 is 66 years, so "seventy" is taken as round or the end point moved later (Guzik: the period still had "three or four years" to run at Dan 9).
Proponents: S. R. Driver (1900): "the 70 years of the Chaldaean supremacy"; D. Guzik (counting from 605, the first deportation) · Sources: The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); Daniel 9 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Desolation of the Temple: 587/586 to 516/515 BC
PreteristInner-biblical reading (Zechariah); patristicMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: in Darius I's second year (Zech 1:7, 12) the angel still speaks of "these seventy years" of indignation against Jerusalem, and the Temple was finished in Darius's sixth year (Ezra 6:15). From the destruction (587/586) to the completion (Adar 515) is about 70 years (operator arithmetic). Objection: Jeremiah's own wording is about serving Babylon, not the Temple.
Proponents: Zechariah 1:12; 7:5 (text, in Darius I's 2nd and 4th years); Jerome ("seventy years for the desolation of the Temple") · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 9; Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.–A.D. 45 (SAOC 24)
The land's sabbaths, ended by Cyrus's decree (Chronicler)
PreteristInner-biblical reading (Chronicles)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
The Chronicler joins Jeremiah's seventy years to the land enjoying its sabbaths (Lev 26:34–35) "until the reign of the kingdom of Persia", and dates Cyrus's proclamation to his first year "that the LORD's word by Jeremiah's mouth might be accomplished". Driver notes that Dan 9:24 develops this sabbatical reading into seventy weeks of years. Guzik: about 490 years of neglected sabbath years left the land owing seventy, collected in the exile; he gives no start or end year.
Proponents: 2 Chronicles 36:20–22 (text); S. R. Driver (on Dan 9:2 and 9:24); D. Guzik (2 Chronicles 36) · Sources: The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); 2 Chronicles 36 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
The seventy weeks (Dan 9:24–27)
Seventy weeks are decreed on Daniel's people and city: seven weeks from a word to rebuild Jerusalem to an anointed prince; sixty-two weeks of rebuilding in troubled times; then an anointed one is cut off, a coming prince's people destroy city and sanctuary, a covenant is made for one week, and in its middle sacrifice ceases and an abomination makes desolate. Jerome already found the passage argued "in various ways by men of greatest learning"; Driver calls it the most discussed passage of the Old Testament. Origen (as reported by Jerome) only urged that the years from Darius's first year to Christ be ascertained.
Identified in the text: The text gives the divisions 7 + 62 + 1 (= 70) weeks and the events attached to them. It does not define a "week", name the decree, the anointed one(s), the prince who comes, or the subject of "he will make a firm covenant", and gives no calendar.
Maccabean: 587 BC to Cyrus, to the murder of Onias III (171), to Antiochus IV (164)
PreteristHistorical-criticalMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the "word" is Jeremiah's promise of rebuilding (Jer 30–31, c. 587); seven weeks (49 years) bring "an anointed one, a prince" — Cyrus (Isa 45:1), 538 (Graetz and Bevan: Jeshua); the "anointed one cut off" after 62 more weeks is the high priest Onias III (2 Macc 4:33–35, c. 171); the coming prince is Antiochus IV, whose suspension of sacrifice for half a week matches 167–164. Historical evidence: 1–2 Maccabees. Objections: 538 to 171 is 367 years, not 434 — "too large by 67" (Driver); defenders explain it as a mistaken chronology, citing similar over-estimates by Demetrius and Josephus (Schürer). Acceptance: Driver adopts it as the principal alternative to the traditional view; Montgomery says no period "so neatly fits".
Proponents: S. R. Driver (1900); J. A. Montgomery (1927); Bevan, Cornill, Schürer (cited by Driver) · Sources: The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (ICC); World English Bible — Apocrypha/Deuterocanon (2 Maccabees 4)
Maccabean variant: overlapping weeks from Jer 25 (605 BC)
PreteristHistorical-criticalMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
The word is Jer 25 (606/605); the seven weeks end c. 558 while the 62 weeks run concurrently from the same point to 171; the last week ends 164. Objection (Driver): Jer 25 contains a rebuilding promise only implicitly, and the text gives no hint that the 62 weeks do not follow the 7.
Proponents: A. Hilgenfeld; G. Behrmann (both as reported by Driver) · Sources: The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges)
Messianic, continuous: from Artaxerxes' seventh year (Ezra 7) to Christ
HistoricistTraditional Protestant; historicistMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: 490 years run from Ezra's commission (Artaxerxes I year 7; Newton: Julian Period 4257, 458/457 BC) to Christ's death, which "made reconciliation"; Newton counts the 62 weeks separately from Nehemiah's wall (28th year? — Newton) to Christ's birth and applies the seven weeks to the second coming; Miller counts 457 BC + 490 = AD 33. Objections (Driver): Ezra 7 says nothing of rebuilding Jerusalem; the RV punctuation separates the 7 and 62 weeks; Christ's ministry lasted about 3½ years, not a week; the destruction of AD 70 falls outside the 490 years.
Proponents: I. Newton (1733); W. Miller (1842); Auberlen and Pusey (as reported by Driver) · Sources: Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John; Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ, about the Year 1843; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges)
Messianic with a gap: 69 weeks from Artaxerxes' twentieth year to the triumphal entry; the 70th week future
FuturistDispensational premillennialMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: only Neh 2 commands the city and wall to be built; 69 weeks of 360-day "prophetic years" (173,880 days) run from 1 Nisan of Artaxerxes' 20th year, which Anderson fixes at 14 March 445 BC from an astronomical new moon supplied by the Astronomer Royal, to 6 April AD 32, Jesus' entry into Jerusalem; after the 69th week comes "a gap or parenthesis" and the 70th week is future, with the coming prince as Antichrist. Objections: Guzik himself notes AD 32 is controversial (most chronologists prefer AD 30 or 33); Driver insists the weeks run consecutively and have the same value; Parker & Dubberstein's Babylonian table puts 1 Nisan of Artaxerxes' 20th year on 13 April, not 14 March, 445 (operator comparison — the Judean calendar may have differed). Acceptance: widely held in dispensational circles (not quantified in sources read). Arithmetic (operator check): in Julian reckoning the stated dates are 173,882 days apart; Anderson's 173,880 applies a Gregorian leap-year correction to Julian dates (his own note).
Proponents: Sir Robert Anderson, The Coming Prince (1881); D. Guzik (also citing Walvoord and Ironside) · Sources: The Coming Prince, or the Seventy Weeks of Daniel (11th edition); Daniel 9 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.–A.D. 45 (SAOC 24)
Africanus: Artaxerxes' 20th year to Christ in lunar years (reported by Jerome)
PreteristPatristic (3rd century)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
Counts from Artaxerxes' 20th year (Ol. 83.4) to the 15th year of Tiberius (Ol. 202.2): 475 solar years, which, reckoned in Hebrew lunar years with intercalation, make 490. Reckoning from Cyrus or from Daniel's vision falls short; from the start of the captivity it overshoots.
Proponents: Julius Africanus, Chronographiae book 5 (quoted by Jerome) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 9
Eusebius (1): the anointed are the high priests from Jeshua to Alexander Jannaeus (reported by Jerome)
PreteristPatristic (4th century)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
From Cyrus, 7 weeks cover the long-delayed rebuilding of the Temple; 62 weeks (483 years in all) run through the succession of anointed high priests to the death of Alexander Jannaeus, after which civil strife, Pompey and Herod ended the legitimate line.
Proponents: Eusebius of Caesarea (quoted by Jerome) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 9
Eusebius (2): from Darius's sixth year to Herod; the half-week is Christ's ministry (reported by Jerome)
PreteristPatristic (4th century)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
69 weeks run from the completion of the Temple in Darius's sixth year to Herod's seizure of Judaea and the murder of Hyrcanus; Christ preached 3½ years and after his passion sacrifice ceased "in the middle of the week". Eusebius also reports a view that the last week was seventy years (Nero to Trajan), which Jerome finds inconsistent.
Proponents: Eusebius of Caesarea (Chronicle; reported by Jerome) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 9
Hippolytus: 62 weeks to Christ's birth; the last week at the end of the world (reported by Jerome)
FuturistPatristic (3rd century)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
Seven weeks precede the return from Babylon, sixty-two run to Christ's birth, and the final week is divided between Elijah and the Antichrist at the end of the age. Jerome objects that the Persian and Macedonian periods give about 560 years, not 483.
Proponents: Hippolytus (reported by Jerome) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 9
Apollinaris of Laodicea: from Christ's birth; a future rebuilding and Antichrist (reported by Jerome)
FuturistPatristic (4th century)
Counts from the "going forth of the Word" at Christ's birth: 7 weeks to the eighth year of Claudius, then 62 weeks (434 years), after which Jerusalem would be rebuilt in the last week, Elijah would come and the Antichrist sit in the Temple. Jerome warns that later generations would have to convict him of error if the dates failed; no historical fulfillment is claimed here.
Proponents: Apollinaris of Laodicea (quoted by Jerome) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 9
Clement of Alexandria: Cyrus to Vespasian and Titus (reported by Jerome)
PreteristPatristic (c. AD 200)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
The seventy weeks span the Persian, Macedonian and Roman ages from Cyrus to the destruction of the Temple under Vespasian and Titus. Jerome objects that this interval is about 630 years.
Proponents: Clement of Alexandria (reported by Jerome) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 9
Tertullian: from Darius's first year to Christ's birth (62½ weeks) and to Vespasian (70 weeks) (reported by Jerome)
PreteristPatristic (c. AD 200), Adversus IudaeosMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Begins at the first year of Darius, when the vision was given; Persian, Macedonian and Ptolemaic reigns total 437½ years to Christ's birth in Augustus's 41st year; adding the emperors to Vespasian's capture of Jerusalem completes the seventy weeks. The regnal figures are Tertullian's own and do not match modern chronology.
Proponents: Tertullian, Against the Jews (quoted by Jerome) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 9
"The Hebrews": from Darius the Mede to the destructions under Vespasian and Hadrian (reported by Jerome)
PreteristJewish interpretation of Jerome's day (as reported by a Christian author)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
From the first year of Darius (who slew Belshazzar), the city and Temple are rebuilt; the 62 weeks run to the perpetual desolation under Vespasian, and the single week is split between Vespasian (3½ years of peace) and Hadrian's final war. Jerome objects that the interval is 696 years. This is a hostile witness's paraphrase; rabbinic sources were not read directly.
Proponents: Jewish teachers reported by Jerome · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 9
Symbolic weeks: from Cyrus's word to Christ, the age of the church, and the last enemy
MixedSymbolic (non-chronological) reading; conservative Lutheran, amillennial-type (Keil after Kliefoth and Leyrer)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: šābûaʿ means "a period of sevens" without fixing the unit, while Daniel elsewhere uses exact measures (8:14 evenings-mornings; 12:11 days); the answer to Daniel's question about seventy years is a divine measure, not a calendar. The seven sevens run from the word to rebuild (Isa 44:28, Cyrus) to the Messiah; the sixty-two are the building of God's city in troubled times; the last seven is the final enemy's rule and judgment. Every chronological reckoning, Keil argues, does violence to the text or fails arithmetically; the times of the end are reserved to God (Acts 1:7; Mark 13:32). Objections: Guzik criticises commentators who ignore the numbers; Driver requires weeks of equal value in order; preterist and dispensational readers both treat the numbers as calendrical.
Proponents: C. F. Keil (1872); Th. Kliefoth and Leyrer (as followed by Keil); J. Baldwin ("symbolic and not arithmetical", as quoted by Guzik) · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Keil & Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament); Daniel 9 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges)
The princes of Persia and Greece and Michael (Dan 10:13, 20–21)
Daniel 10:13–21 · Daniel's vision by the Tigris in the third year of Cyrus (Dan 10:1–11:1)
A heavenly conflict: the prince of Persia resists, Michael helps, and the prince of Greece "will come". The chapter introduces the revelation of 11:2–12:4.
Identified in the text: Michael is "your prince" — the prince of Daniel's people (10:21; 12:1). The princes of Persia and Greece are not otherwise identified.
Patron (guardian) angels of the nations
MixedPatristic and historical-critical
Each nation has an angelic prince in heaven whose success matches its own; Michael is Israel's. Textual reasoning: Deut 32:8 in the LXX (and a reading Driver notes some think original) divides the nations "according to the number of the sons/angels of God"; Sir 17:17; Isa 24:21. Driver: the doctrine of tutelary angels appears distinctly for the first time here, developed later into seventy angel-princes of the nations (Targum Ps.-Jonathan, as cited by Driver). This is a statement about the text's worldview, not a historical claim.
Proponents: Jerome (citing Deut 32:8: "according to the number of the angels of God"); S. R. Driver (1900); J. A. Montgomery (1927) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 10; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (ICC)
Hostile spiritual powers (high-ranking demons) opposing God's purposes
MixedConservative evangelical
The prince of Persia is "a demon of high rank", not a human ruler; prayer is linked to unseen conflict (cf. Eph 6:12; John 12:31). Guzik rejects reading the prince as a human king.
Proponents: D. Guzik (citing Walvoord, Wood and Baldwin) · Sources: Daniel 10 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
The coming of the prince of Greece = the Macedonian overthrow of Persia
PreteristPatristicMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
After the Jews were freed, Alexander slew Darius and overthrew the Persians and Medes, so that "the prince of the Greeks did overcome the prince of the Persians". Historical evidence: Arrian on Gaugamela (331) and Darius III's death (330). Objection: the text speaks of heavenly princes, and the link to a particular event is the interpreter's.
Proponents: Jerome · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 10; Arrian, Anabasis of Alexander (trans. E. J. Chinnock, 1884)
The king who exalts himself (Dan 11:36–45)
Daniel 11:36–45 · Daniel's vision by the Tigris in the third year of Cyrus (Dan 10:1–11:1)
The king does according to his will, magnifies himself above every god, honours a god of fortresses; at the time of the end he overruns the glorious land and Egypt, is troubled by news from east and north, plants his tents between the sea and the glorious holy mountain, and comes to his end with no one to help.
Identified in the text: No name or date; "at the time of the end" (11:40).
Antiochus IV continued; 11:40–45 an unfulfilled or idealised forecast of his end
PreteristHistorical-criticalMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: "the king" continues the subject of 11:21–35; Antiochus's divine titles and Hellenising religious policy fit 11:36–39. But 11:40–45 (a final conquest of Egypt, death between the sea and the holy mountain) does not match the record: Antiochus went east in 166/165 and died at Tabae in Persia (Polybius 31.9; BM 35603, 164 BC). Driver: the prophecy correctly foretold his speedy doom, while the circumstances "do not correspond to what we know of the historical reality" — like details in earlier prophets. Porphyry's fourth Egyptian expedition is known only through Jerome and conflicts with Roman protection of Egypt (Bevan, via Driver).
Proponents: S. R. Driver (1900); J. A. Montgomery (1927); Porphyry (per Jerome, with a fourth Egyptian campaign) · Sources: The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (ICC); Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 11; Polybius, Histories 31.9 (Loeb VI, 1927) — LacusCurtius; Babylonian King List of the Hellenistic Period (BM 35603) — Livius.org, Seleucus IV entries
A future Antichrist (transition at 11:36)
FuturistPatristic; Jewish (per Jerome); modern dispensational
The king of 11:36–45 is the end-time Antichrist who sits in the Temple as God (2 Thess 2:4); he dies between the seas at the holy mountain (Jerome: near the Mount of Olives, with Apedno = "his throne"). Guzik places the transition at 11:36 and speculates that the king of the north may be Russia. Future reference; not a claim of historical fulfilment. Objection (Driver): there is no break in the text at 11:36.
Proponents: Jerome; Jewish teachers reported by Jerome; D. Guzik (Antiochus a "trailer", the Antichrist the "feature") · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 11; Daniel 11 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges)
The Byzantine "Greek" empire; king of the south = Saracens, king of the north = Turks (historicist)
HistoricistProtestant historicistMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
After the division of the Roman empire, "the king" is the empire of the Greeks, which honoured "Mahuzzims" (the saints and their relics) and forbade marriage to monks; at the time of the end the Saracens (south) and Turks (north) attacked it, and the Turkish empire took Egypt, Libya and Ethiopia. Objection: requires the subject to change several times without textual signal.
Proponents: I. Newton (1733) · Sources: Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John
The kings of the south and the north (Dan 11:5–20)
Daniel 11:5–20 · Daniel's vision by the Tigris in the third year of Cyrus (Dan 10:1–11:1)
A sequence of wars and marriage alliances between the king of the south and the king of the north, ending with a raiser of taxes who is destroyed "not in anger, and not in battle".
Identified in the text: The text calls them only "the king of the south" and "the king of the north"; it names Egypt (11:8) and "the glorious land" (11:16) and no persons.
Ptolemies and Seleucids from Ptolemy I to Seleucus IV
PreteristAgreed by Porphyry and Jerome; followed by historicist, critical and evangelical commentatorsMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the sequence matches the Ptolemaic (south) and Seleucid (north) kings as seen from Judaea. 11:5 Ptolemy I and his former officer Seleucus I; 11:6 Berenice, daughter of Ptolemy II, married to Antiochus II and killed after his death; 11:7–9 her brother Ptolemy III invades and carries off gods and treasure; 11:10 the sons of Seleucus II — Seleucus III and Antiochus III; 11:11–12 Ptolemy IV wins at Raphia (Polybius 5.82–87) but does not follow up; 11:13–16 Antiochus III returns, defeats Scopas at Panium and takes Judaea (Polybius 16.18–19, 39); 11:17 Cleopatra I given to Ptolemy V; 11:18 Antiochus turns to the coastlands and is stopped by a Roman commander (Lucius Scipio, Magnesia); 11:19 he dies in his own land (BM 35603: "killed in Elam"); 11:20 Seleucus IV, whose minister Heliodorus was sent for the Temple money, killed by conspiracy (Appian, Syr. 45). Historical evidence: Polybius, Appian, the Babylonian king list. Objection: the correlations are made by the interpreters; Daniel names no one.
Proponents: Porphyry (per Jerome: "no point of controversy" up to 11:20); Jerome; I. Newton; S. R. Driver; D. Guzik · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 11; Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); Daniel 11 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; Polybius, Histories 5.82–87 (Loeb III, 1923) — LacusCurtius; Polybius, Histories 16.18–19, 16.39 (Loeb V, 1926) — LacusCurtius; Appian, Syrian Wars 41–45 — Livius.org; Babylonian King List of the Hellenistic Period (BM 35603) — Livius.org, Seleucus IV entries
Variants at 11:20: Ptolemy V (Porphyry), Trypho ("the Hebrews"), Seleucus III (Guzik)
PreteristMinority variants reported by Jerome; GuzikMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Porphyry took the raiser of taxes to be Ptolemy V Epiphanes; "the Hebrews" took the vile one of 11:20–21 to be Trypho; Guzik names "Seleucus III, the eldest son of Antiochus III". Objections: Jerome answers that Ptolemy did not rise "in the place" of Antiochus III; the Babylonian king list makes Seleucus IV (not Seleucus III, who preceded Antiochus III) the son who succeeded Antiochus III and reigned 12 years.
Proponents: Porphyry (per Jerome); Jewish teachers reported by Jerome; D. Guzik · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 11; Daniel 11 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; Babylonian King List of the Hellenistic Period (BM 35603) — Livius.org, Seleucus IV entries
11:14: the Onias temple at Leontopolis (Jerome)
PreteristPatristicMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
"The children of the violent among your people … to establish the vision" are the Jews who followed the high priest Onias to Egypt and built a rival temple (citing Isa 19:19); Driver instead refers the verse to Jews who sided with Antiochus III (not read in full). The dating of the Leontopolis temple (later than Antiochus III) is a problem for Jerome's reading.
Proponents: Jerome · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 11
Four kings of Persia; the fourth stirs up all against Greece (Dan 11:2)
Daniel 11:2 · Daniel's vision by the Tigris in the third year of Cyrus (Dan 10:1–11:1)
Three more kings will arise in Persia; the fourth, far richer, will stir up all against the realm of Greece.
Identified in the text: The text names Persia and Greece (Yavan) but no king.
Cambyses, (Pseudo-)Smerdis, Darius I, Xerxes
PreteristPatristic and historical-criticalMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
After Cyrus (10:1) come Cambyses, the Magian Smerdis/Gaumata and Darius I; the fourth is Xerxes, whose wealth and invasion of Greece match the verse (Herodotus 7). Driver prefers counting Cyrus as the first, so that Gaumata may be omitted and Xerxes is still the fourth. Jerome rejects identifying the fourth with Darius III, who was "the fourteenth" king after Cyrus.
Proponents: Jerome; S. R. Driver (counting Gaumata, or with Cyrus included) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 11; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges)
Cyrus, Cambyses, Darius I; Xerxes the fourth
HistoricistProtestant historicistMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Newton counts Cyrus, Cambyses and Darius Hystaspes as the three and Xerxes as the fourth. Guzik names only Xerxes and leaves the count open. Objection (all readings): Daniel then passes over the remaining Persian kings to Alexander — Jerome: Scripture "summarizes only the most important matters".
Proponents: I. Newton (1733); D. Guzik (the count may omit Cyrus or Smerdis) · Sources: Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John; Daniel 11 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
A mighty king and the fourfold division of his kingdom (Dan 11:3–4)
Daniel 11:3–4 · Daniel's vision by the Tigris in the third year of Cyrus (Dan 10:1–11:1)
A mighty king rules with great dominion; at his height his kingdom is broken toward the four winds, not to his posterity.
Identified in the text: The text does not name the king; it parallels the goat's great horn (8:8, 21–22), which the text calls "the first king" of Greece.
Alexander the Great and the partition among his generals
PreteristCommon to patristic, historicist, critical and evangelical interpretersMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Alexander died young and his heirs did not inherit; the empire was divided among his generals (Jerome: Ptolemy, Philip Arrhidaeus, Seleucus, Antigonus; Newton: Ptolemy, Antigonus, Lysimachus, Cassander, with Seleucus later). "Others besides these" (11:4) = lesser kingdoms (Jerome). Acceptance: no dissent found among sources consulted.
Proponents: Jerome; I. Newton; S. R. Driver; D. Guzik · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 11; Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); Daniel 11 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; Arrian, Anabasis of Alexander (trans. E. J. Chinnock, 1884)
The contemptible person (Dan 11:21–35)
Daniel 11:21–35 · Daniel's vision by the Tigris in the third year of Cyrus (Dan 10:1–11:1)
A contemptible person takes the kingdom by flattery, breaks the prince of the covenant, invades the south twice, is turned back by ships of Kittim, profanes the sanctuary, removes the continual offering and sets up the abomination that makes desolate; the wise suffer and receive "a little help".
Identified in the text: The text gives no name. "Kittim" (11:30) is a place-name (Cyprus/western coastlands, Driver); "the abomination that makes desolate" recurs in 9:27 and 12:11.
Antiochus IV Epiphanes, 175–167 BC
PreteristPorphyry; historical-critical; also the near fulfilment in evangelical readingsMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the contemptible person replaces the raiser of taxes (Seleucus IV) without hereditary right (Antiochus IV replaced his brother's son); "the prince of the covenant" broken = Onias III deposed in 175 (Driver) or the young Ptolemy VI; two Egyptian campaigns (170–169, 168); "ships of Kittim" = the Roman envoys and Popillius Laenas at Eleusis (Polybius 29.27); the Temple plundered (1 Macc 1:20–24) and the abomination set up on 15 Chislev 145 (1 Macc 1:54); "a little help" = Mattathias and the Maccabees (Porphyry). Historical evidence: Polybius, Appian, 1–2 Maccabees, BM 35603. Acceptance: Jerome concedes "there is no doubt" Antiochus did several of these things while reading them as typological.
Proponents: Porphyry (per Jerome); S. R. Driver (1900); J. A. Montgomery (1927); D. Guzik (to 11:35) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 11; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (ICC); Daniel 11 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; Polybius, Histories 29.27 (Loeb VI, 1927) — LacusCurtius; Appian, Syrian Wars 41–45 — Livius.org; World English Bible — Apocrypha/Deuterocanon (1 Maccabees; 2 Esdras); World English Bible — Apocrypha/Deuterocanon (2 Maccabees 4); Babylonian King List of the Hellenistic Period (BM 35603) — Livius.org, Seleucus IV entries
The Antichrist, with Antiochus as a type
FuturistPatristic ("our school", per Jerome)
From 11:21 the prophecy speaks of the Antichrist at the end of the world; Antiochus's deeds are preliminary "types" (as Solomon prefigures Christ in Ps 72). Jerome nevertheless reports the Antiochus history verse by verse. Future reference; not a claim of historical fulfilment.
Proponents: Jerome and the Christian writers he follows · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 11
Jewish readings reported by Jerome: the Romans (11:31) and Julian (11:34)
PreteristJewish interpretation of Jerome's day (hostile report)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
The ships of Kittim are the Romans; Vespasian's son Titus profaned the sanctuary and removed the continual sacrifice; the "little help" was the emperor Julian (or Severus and Antoninus), who favoured the Jews. Known only through Jerome.
Proponents: Jewish teachers reported by Jerome · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 11
From 11:31 the Romans; the little help is Constantine (historicist)
HistoricistProtestant historicistMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
After the Roman conquest of Macedon, "arms" = the Romans, who polluted the sanctuary and placed the abomination (Hadrian's temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, AD 132; Matt 24:15 puts it after Christ); the persecuted Christians were helped "with a little help" by Constantine. Objection: Driver and Porphyry read 11:31 as continuing the same king's actions.
Proponents: I. Newton (1733) · Sources: Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John; The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges)
Michael, the time of trouble and the resurrection (Dan 12:1–3)
Daniel 12:1–3 · Daniel's vision by the Tigris in the third year of Cyrus (Dan 10:1–11:1)
Michael stands up for Daniel's people in an unequalled time of trouble; those written in the book are delivered; many who sleep in the dust awake, some to everlasting life and some to everlasting contempt; the wise shine like the stars.
Identified in the text: The text says "many" (not "all") will awake, in two groups; it names Michael "the great prince who stands for the children of your people" and gives no date beyond "at that time".
Bodily resurrection of the dead at the end; two resurrections
FuturistTraditional Christian (Jerome); dispensational premillennial (Guzik)
After the Antichrist is destroyed, the dead rise, some to life and some to shame (Jerome); Guzik adds that the resurrections to life and to condemnation are separated in time (John 5:29; Rev 20:4–6) and that the time of trouble is the Great Tribulation (Jer 30:7; Matt 24:21). Jerome argues the trouble cannot be Antiochus's, since the Babylonian destruction was worse. Future reference; not a claim of historical fulfilment.
Proponents: Jerome; D. Guzik (citing Baldwin: "many" can mean all) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 12; Daniel 12 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
A resurrection of prominent Israelites (martyrs and apostates) expected after Antiochus's fall
PreteristHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: the first Old Testament passage to teach a resurrection of the wicked as well as the righteous and differing destinies (cf. Isa 26:19, limited to Israel); "many" = those who had conspicuously helped or hindered God's kingdom under Antiochus. Driver: the writer expected the kingdom to follow the tyrant's fall, which it did not — like earlier prophets whose ideal hopes were not realised at once. Later developments: 1 Enoch, 2 Macc 7, the Targums. No historical fulfilment is claimed. The same hope appears in the martyr narrative of 2 Macc 7 ("the King of the world will raise us … up", 7:9; cf. 7:14).
Proponents: S. R. Driver (1900); J. A. Montgomery (1927) · Sources: The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (ICC); The Book of Enoch (trans. R. H. Charles, SPCK 1917); World English Bible — Apocrypha/Deuterocanon (2 Maccabees 3, 6, 7, 9–11)
Metaphorical: the Maccabean loyalists "rise" from caves to victory (Porphyry, via Jerome)
PreteristAnti-Christian philosophical critique (3rd century), known through JeromeMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
The persecution under Antiochus and Lysias was the unequalled trouble; after Antiochus died in Persia the faithful hidden in caves (1 Macc 2) rose "as if" from the dead to victory, while the apostates rose to disgrace. Jerome objects that Porphyry cannot say who "shone like the stars" and that the Babylonian catastrophe was greater.
Proponents: Porphyry (reported by Jerome) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 12
A time, times and a half; 1,290 and 1,335 days (Dan 12:7, 11–12)
Daniel 12:7–12 · Daniel's vision by the Tigris in the third year of Cyrus (Dan 10:1–11:1)
The man in linen swears it will be "a time, times and a half"; from the removal of the continual offering and the setting up of the abomination there will be 1,290 days; blessed is the one who reaches 1,335 days. Arithmetic recorded (operator): 1,290 − 1,260 = 30; 1,335 − 1,290 = 45; 3½ years of 360 days = 1,260; 8:14's 2,300 offerings = 1,150 days.
Identified in the text: The text gives the starting point of the 1,290 days — the removal of the continual offering and the setting up of the abomination (cf. 11:31) — but not the end-point of either number; "a time, times and a half" also appears in 7:25.
Day counts from the desecration of 15 Chislev 145 (Dec 168): 1,290 days to c. June 164, the death of Antiochus
PreteristHistorical-criticalMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the starting point is the event of 11:31 (1 Macc 1:54). 1,290 days from Dec 168 end in June 164; Antiochus died in 164 (exact date unknown), and the writer may have pictured his death at that point; the further 45 days to 1,335 mark when blessedness would begin — "impossible to say with any certainty" (Driver). Objections: the Temple was rededicated after about 3 years and 10 days (1 Macc 4:52), not 1,290 days; the result depends on dating the desecration to 168 (disputed) and on an unknown date of death.
Proponents: S. R. Driver (1900); C. H. Cornill (as cited by Driver: 6 June 164) · Sources: The Book of Daniel (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); World English Bible — Apocrypha/Deuterocanon (1 Maccabees; 2 Esdras)
Successive glosses lengthening the 1,150 days as the end was delayed
PreteristHistorical-critical (redactional)
The 1,290 and the 1,335 days are "successive later insertions, due to the retardation of the term of 1150 days" (8:14); Montgomery notes general agreement on 168 and 165 for the desecration and rededication, and that Josephus's 3½ years (B.J.) accommodates Daniel while 1 Maccabees keeps three years. No fulfilment is claimed.
Proponents: J. A. Montgomery (1927) · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (ICC)
Porphyry: 1,290 days of the desolation under Antiochus; 45 more days of victory and cleansing (via Jerome)
PreteristAnti-Christian philosophical critique (3rd century), known through JeromeMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
The 1,290 days were the desolation of the Temple under Antiochus; the extra 45 days were Judas Maccabaeus's victory over Antiochus's generals and the cleansing of the Temple. Jerome objects that 1 Maccabees and Josephus give three years, not three and a half.
Proponents: Porphyry (reported by Jerome) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 12; World English Bible — Apocrypha/Deuterocanon (1 Maccabees; 2 Esdras); Josephus, Antiquities 12.7.6–7 (trans. W. Whiston)
The Antichrist's 3½ years; 45 more days to Christ's coming / to the judgment of the nations
FuturistPatristic (Jerome); dispensational (Guzik)
Jerome: the Antichrist persecutes 1,290 days and dies; the Lord comes in glory within the further 45 days. Guzik: 1,260 days to Christ's return, 1,290 to the installation of his government, 1,335 to the judgment of the nations (Matt 25:31–46); he admits the relationship is difficult. Future reference; not a claim of historical fulfilment.
Proponents: Jerome; D. Guzik (tentative, citing Smith) · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 12; Daniel 12 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Year-day: 1,290 years from AD 508 to 1798; 1,335 years to AD 1843
HistoricistMillerite (19th-century American Adventism)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
A prophetic day is a year; the "daily" taken away is pagan worship, removed in AD 508; 1,290 years end in 1798 with the end of papal civil power; 1,335 years end in 1843 with Christ's return and the first resurrection. Objection: the expected return in 1843 did not occur; Guzik and Driver read the numbers as days.
Proponents: W. Miller (1842) · Sources: Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ, about the Year 1843
Symbolic numbers: a God-measured period of the affliction under Antiochus, not reckonable
MixedSymbolic reading (Keil)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
The 1,290 days denote in general the sorest affliction of Israel by Antiochus — a moderate period exactly measured by God — and the extra 45 days a short further time until the oppression wholly ceases; neither number can be reckoned chronologically (both slightly exceed 3½ years of 360 days). Keil objects to the Antiochus-death reading: 2,300 evening-mornings are whole days, and no event 45 days after Antiochus's death began a better time — the war continued under Antiochus V (1 Macc 6:18–54) and the victory over Nicanor came two years later (1 Macc 7:26–50). Objection: Driver and Montgomery treat the numbers as calendar days (or glosses).
Proponents: C. F. Keil (1872) · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Keil & Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament)
Seal the book until the time of the end (Dan 12:4, 9)
Daniel 12:4 · Daniel's vision by the Tigris in the third year of Cyrus (Dan 10:1–11:1)
Daniel is to close and seal the book to the time of the end; many will run to and fro and knowledge will increase.
Identified in the text: 12:9 repeats that the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end, and 12:10 that the wise will understand.
Many will read and search the obscure book
IdealistPatristic
"Many shall pass through" = many will read the book and disagree about its fulfilment because of its obscurity (cf. Isa 29:11; Rev 5).
Proponents: Jerome · Sources: Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (trans. Gleason L. Archer, 1958) — chapter 12
End-time increase of prophetic knowledge (and, for some, travel and information)
FuturistEvangelical futuristMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Guzik notes the common reading of modern travel and the information explosion, prefers "searching for knowledge", and suggests that the growth of prophetic study over the last 150 years indicates the period has begun. This is a tentative fulfilment claim about modern times.
Proponents: D. Guzik (citing Wood and Newell; quoting Adam Clarke) · Sources: Daniel 12 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
The cup of the wine of wrath for the nations (Jer 25:15–38)
Jeremiah is to make the nations drink the cup of wrath — Jerusalem and Judah first, then Egypt, Philistia, Edom, Moab, Ammon, Tyre, Sidon, Arabia, Elam, the Medes, all the kings of the north and all the kingdoms — and last "the king of Sheshach"; the LORD roars against all flesh.
Identified in the text: The text interprets the cup as the sword the LORD sends (25:16, 27) and begins with Jerusalem (25:18, 29). It does not explain Sheshach.
Babylon's conquests of the listed nations in the sixth century, ending with Babylon's own fall
PreteristHistorical (Feinberg; partly Guzik)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
Judah, its neighbours and Egypt fell under Nebuchadnezzar; Babylon itself fell to the Medes and Persians (cf. 25:12–14). Josephus reports a campaign of Nebuchadnezzar's 23rd year against Coele-Syria, Ammon, Moab and Egypt. Objection: Guzik judges the list too complete for one historical sequence.
Proponents: C. L. Feinberg (via Guzik): the "many nations and great kings" are the Medes and Persians; Josephus (Ant. 10.9.7) for the campaign against Ammon, Moab and Egypt in Nebuchadnezzar's 23rd year · Sources: Jeremiah 25 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; Josephus, Antiquities 10.9.7 (trans. W. Whiston)
The final judgment of the nations
FuturistEvangelical (Guzik)
The list is too complete to fit one event; the ultimate fulfilment is the judgment of the nations (Rev 19:11–18). Not a historical fulfilment claim.
Proponents: D. Guzik · Sources: Jeremiah 25 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Sheshach = Babel by atbash cipher
MixedTextual interpretation (Jerome; many, per Guzik)
Reversing the alphabet turns ššk into bbl (Babel). Kidner notes Babylon is named openly elsewhere, so the code may reflect a habit of caution. An identification within the text, not a fulfilment claim.
Proponents: Jerome (as reported by Guzik); D. Kidner (cautious, via Guzik) · Sources: Jeremiah 25 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Cyrus the LORD's shepherd and anointed (Isa 44:24–45:13)
The LORD names Cyrus "my shepherd", who will fulfil his purpose, say of Jerusalem "She will be built" and of the Temple "Your foundation will be laid" (44:28); calls him "his anointed", whose right hand he has held, to subdue nations and open doors and gates (45:1–3), for Israel's sake though Cyrus has not known him (45:4–5); he will build the LORD's city and free the exiles, not for price or reward (45:13).
Identified in the text: The text names Cyrus explicitly (44:28; 45:1) and states the purposes: Jerusalem rebuilt, the Temple founded, exiles freed. It does not name Babylon in these verses (cf. 47:1; 48:14).
Predictive prophecy of Isaiah of Jerusalem, fulfilled by Cyrus (539–538)
PreteristTraditional Jewish and ChristianMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the book is headed as Isaiah's (1:1), and the passage presents the naming of Cyrus as proof that the LORD foretells (44:24–26). Fulfilment: Cyrus took Babylon (539) and in his first year authorised the return and the Temple (Ezra 1; 2 Chr 36:22–23). Guzik: the name is woven into the poem and cannot be a later insertion; Motyer: no basis to limit prediction. Josephus says Cyrus himself was moved by reading it. Objection: critical scholarship dates the passage to Cyrus's own career (below). Note: the Whiston text of Josephus gives 140 years before the destruction; Guzik (via Bultema) reports 220.
Proponents: Josephus (Ant. 11.1.1–2: Cyrus read his name in Isaiah, "one hundred and forty years before the temple was demolished"); D. Guzik (more than 200 years before Cyrus's birth; citing Poole and Motyer) · Sources: Josephus, Antiquities 11.1.1–3 (trans. W. Whiston); Isaiah 44 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; Isaiah 45 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
An exilic prophet announcing Cyrus's imminent conquest (c. 546–539), fulfilled shortly after
PreteristHistorical-criticalMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: Cyrus is addressed as an already famous conqueror whose victories have shaken the world (41:2–3, 25) while Babylon's capture is still future (45:2–3; 48:14), so chs. 40–48 date between 550 and 539, almost certainly after the fall of Sardis (546); 46:1 may allude to Nabonidus's moving of the gods in 539 (Sellin, via Skinner). The announced events followed: Babylon fell in 539 and Cyrus's decree allowed the return. Objection: Guzik and Motyer reject the premise that detailed prediction is impossible; Skinner records that the case rests on internal evidence.
Proponents: J. Skinner (1898), summarising S. R. Driver; J. C. Döderlein (1775), with Ibn Ezra as a guarded forerunner (per Skinner) · Sources: The Book of the Prophet Isaiah, Chapters XL–LXVI (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); Isaiah 44 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
The man of God from Judah against the altar of Bethel: "Josiah by name" (1 Kgs 13:1–3)
At Jeroboam's altar in Bethel a man of God announces that a son named Josiah will be born to David's house and will sacrifice the priests of the high places on it and burn human bones on it (1 Kgs 13:2).
Identified in the text: 2 Kgs 23:15–18 narrates Josiah burning bones on the Bethel altar "according to the LORD's word which the man of God proclaimed" and sparing that prophet's tomb. The text itself states the fulfilment.
Predictive prophecy in Jeroboam's time, fulfilled by Josiah at Bethel (c. 622/621)
PreteristTraditional Jewish and ChristianMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: 2 Kgs 23:16–18 explicitly cites the earlier word and the prophet's tomb. Historical evidence: none external for either the prophecy or the desecration of the Bethel altar was read in this session. Objection: critical scholarship dates the 1 Kings 13 narrative later (next interpretation).
Proponents: 2 Kings 23:16 (text); Josephus (Ant. 10.4.4: the prophet "Jadon"; fulfilled "after three hundred and sixty-one years"); D. Guzik (citing Knapp: "more than three hundred years") · Sources: Josephus, Antiquities 10.4.1–10.5.2 (trans. W. Whiston); 2 Kings 23 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
A later narrative shaped in the light of Josiah's reform (not an early prediction)
PreteristHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: Driver notes that the narrative dates from a time when the names of both the Judean prophet and the old prophet were no longer remembered (p. 183); he does not argue this point at length in the pages read. Objection: the traditional reading treats the naming of Josiah as genuine prediction; neither position is testable from external evidence.
Proponents: S. R. Driver (1891): "a narrative not probably of very early origin" · Sources: An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament (1st ed.)
Huldah's oracle: judgment on Jerusalem; Josiah gathered in peace (2 Kgs 22:15–20)
The LORD will bring all the evil written in the book on "this place" and its inhabitants because they forsook him; but because Josiah humbled himself, he will be gathered to his grave in peace and will not see the evil (2 Kgs 22:16–20; 2 Chr 34:24–28).
Identified in the text: Kings itself narrates the outcome: the LORD did not turn from his wrath (23:26–27); Josiah was killed at Megiddo (23:29) and Jerusalem fell later (25:8–10).
Judgment fulfilled in the Babylonian conquest (597–587/586); delayed beyond Josiah's lifetime
PreteristTraditional Jewish and Christian; historical narrativeMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: Kings links the destruction to Manasseh's provocation and to this oracle (23:26–27; 24:3–4). Historical evidence: Jerusalem was taken in 597 (ABC 5) and the Temple burned in 587/586; Josiah died in 609, before any of this. Objection: the fulfilment is narrated by the same history that records the oracle; there is no independent witness to the oracle itself.
Proponents: Josephus (Ant. 10.4.2: God "would at present delay those calamities" because Josiah was righteous); D. Guzik; C. F. Keil (1872) · Sources: Josephus, Antiquities 10.4.1–10.5.2 (trans. W. Whiston); 2 Kings 22 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; Biblical Commentary on the Books of the Kings (Clark's Foreign Theological Library)
"Gathered to your grave in peace" fulfilled in Josiah's death before the catastrophe, though he died in battle
PreteristHarmonising (traditional)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: 22:20 explains "in peace" by "your eyes will not see all the evil". Objection: Josiah was killed by Necho (23:29) — a tension readers have noticed; the harmonisation rests on the meaning of the formula, which Keil supports from 1 Kgs 22. A view that the oracle was composed before Josiah's death and not revised was not found in the sources read and is not attributed here. Curtis and Madsen, writing from a critical standpoint, take the unfulfilled-looking "in peace" as evidence that the oracle was written before Josiah fell; Selman (via Guzik) reads it as the exile not coming in his lifetime.
Proponents: C. F. Keil (1872): the phrase is used also of death in battle (1 Kgs 22:34, 40); "in peace" = without seeing the devastation; J. R. Lumby (1887): none of the threatened evils would come in his time; D. Guzik: three senses — before the disaster, at peace with God, in God's favour; E. L. Curtis and A. A. Madsen (1910): the words were probably written before Josiah's death — "a testimony to the genuineness of the prophecy" · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Books of the Kings (Clark's Foreign Theological Library); The Second Book of the Kings, with Introduction and Notes (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges); 2 Kings 22 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Chronicles (International Critical Commentary)
Zerubbabel the LORD's signet ring (Hag 2:20–23)
The LORD will shake heaven and earth and overthrow the thrones and armies of the nations; on that day he will take Zerubbabel his servant and make him like a signet ring, for he has chosen him.
Identified in the text: The text gives no fulfilment. The signet image reverses Jer 22:24, where Coniah (Jehoiachin), Zerubbabel's grandfather, is torn off like a signet.
Haggai expected Zerubbabel himself to become the Davidic king; the hope was not realised
PreteristHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: Zerubbabel is addressed by name, as "my servant" and "chosen", in a context of overthrown thrones; Haggai "identified Zerubbabel with the long-expected son of David". Historical evidence: Zerubbabel disappears from the record; no Davidic kingdom was restored under Persia.
Proponents: H. G. Mitchell (1912) · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary)
A promise to David's line through Zerubbabel, fulfilled in the Messiah
PreteristTraditional ChristianMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the signet reverses the rejection of Jehoiachin (Jer 22:24) and restores the Davidic line's standing; Keil applies it to Zerubbabel's position as representative of David's house rather than to his person. The New Testament genealogies include Zerubbabel (Matt 1:12–13; Luke 3:27). Objection: Mitchell reads the oracle as a concrete hope for Zerubbabel himself.
Proponents: C. F. Keil (1868), after Koehler, Calvin and Osiander; D. Guzik · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets, vol. 2 (Clark's Foreign Theological Library); Haggai 2 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
The latter glory of this house; the nations' treasures (Hag 2:6–9)
In a little while the LORD will shake heaven, earth, sea, dry land and all nations; "the precious things of all nations will come", he will fill the house with glory; silver and gold are his; the latter glory of the house will be greater than the former, and in this place he will give peace.
Identified in the text: Haggai does not explain the shaking further; 2:21–22 repeats it as the overthrow of kingdoms. Hebrews 12:26–27 applies "once more I will shake" to the removal of created things.
The Messiah, "the Desire of all nations", would come to the Second Temple (fulfilled in Jesus)
PreteristTraditional Christian (after the Vulgate)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: chemdath read as a person ("the desired one"); the glory of the house is the presence of the Messiah. Historical evidence: the Second Temple, enlarged by Herod, stood in Jesus' lifetime. Objection: Mitchell and Keil argue that the parallel "silver … gold" (2:8) shows the word means precious things, not a person.
Proponents: The Vulgate (et veniet desideratus cunctis gentibus) and older commentators citing Luke 2 (as reported by Mitchell); D. Guzik (with Trapp): the latter glory greater because the Lord of glory visited it · Sources: Haggai 2 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary; A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary)
The nations' precious things will adorn the rebuilt Temple
PreteristHistorical-critical and philological
Textual reasoning: chemdath with "silver … gold" (2:8) denotes valuables; Haggai expects the nations, after the coming upheaval, to bring their wealth (cf. Isa 60:5–11). Mitchell holds that Haggai expected this imminently, in the convulsions of Darius's early reign.
Proponents: H. G. Mitchell (1912); C. F. Keil (1868): the nations coming to the Messiah is foreign to the context · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary); Biblical Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets, vol. 2 (Clark's Foreign Theological Library)
An eschatological shaking of heaven and earth
FuturistNew Testament application
Textual reasoning: Hebrews quotes 2:6 for a final shaking that leaves only what cannot be shaken. This reading concerns the shaking, not the Temple's glory.
Proponents: Hebrews 12:26–27 (text); D. Guzik · Sources: Haggai 2 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
The horns that scattered Judah will be cast down (Zech 1:18–21)
Zechariah 1:18–21 · Zechariah's night visions (24 Shebat, Darius year 2; Zech 1:7–6:8)
The powers that scattered Judah, Israel and Jerusalem will be terrified and cast down by four craftsmen.
Identified in the text: The horns are "the horns of the nations" that scattered Judah; neither horns nor craftsmen are named.
The four empires of Daniel: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome
HistoricistTraditional (Jerome; Jewish and Christian)
Textual reasoning: horns for kingdoms recall Dan 7:7–8 and 8:3–9; four horns seen together can stand for empires that followed one another (as the four beasts of Dan 7). Objection: Mitchell argues that no four specific powers can be identified for the dispersion Zechariah had in view, and Greece and Rome had not yet acted.
Proponents: C. F. Keil (1868), with Jerome, Abarbanel and Hengstenberg; D. Guzik ("likely", if read prophetically) · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets, vol. 2 (Clark's Foreign Theological Library); Zechariah 1 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
All the hostile powers that brought about the Judean dispersion; "four" for completeness
PreteristHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: the context (1:12) concerns the dispersion of Judah after Nebuchadnezzar; since the Jews had more than four adversaries but none of the Babylonians' class, four specific powers cannot be identified, and the number expresses totality. "Israel" in 1:19 is doubtful because 1:21 omits it.
Proponents: H. G. Mitchell (1912); Rashi ("the Babylonians at the four winds of heaven"), as reported by Mitchell · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary)
Jerusalem without walls; flee from Babylon; many nations joined to the LORD (Zech 2:4–13)
Zechariah 2:4–13 · Zechariah's night visions (24 Shebat, Darius year 2; Zech 1:7–6:8)
Jerusalem will overflow its walls and the LORD will be its wall of fire; the exiles must flee the land of the north and escape from Babylon; the plunderers will become plunder; the LORD will dwell in Zion, many nations will join themselves to him, and he will again choose Jerusalem.
Identified in the text: The text states the purposes but names no date or agent.
Partial fulfilment in the Persian-era resettlement; ultimate fulfilment in the Messiah's reign
MixedTraditional Christian (futurist emphasis)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the promises of overflowing population and divine protection exceed the small post-exilic city. Historical evidence: Jerusalem was resettled and its walls rebuilt under Nehemiah (Neh 2–6; 11). Guzik sees the ultimate fulfilment in the Messiah's future reign. Objection: the wall-less city of 2:4 stands in tension with Nehemiah's rebuilding of the walls.
Proponents: D. Guzik · Sources: Zechariah 2 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
"My servant the Branch" and the stone with seven eyes (Zech 3:8–10)
Zechariah 3:8–10 · Zechariah's night visions (24 Shebat, Darius year 2; Zech 1:7–6:8)
Joshua and his colleagues are a sign that the LORD will bring his servant the Branch; the stone with seven eyes will be engraved and the land's iniquity removed in one day; then every man will invite his neighbour under vine and fig tree.
Identified in the text: The Branch is not named here; Zech 6:12 says "the man whose name is the Branch … shall build the temple of the LORD".
The Branch is the Messiah (the Davidic Sprout)
MixedTraditional Jewish and ChristianMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: Branch/Sprout is a Davidic-Messianic title in Jeremiah (23:5; 33:15); removing iniquity "in one day" is the Messiah's work (Keil). Christian readers apply it to Jesus. Objection: Mitchell holds that for Zechariah the Shoot is Zerubbabel and that 3:8b is a later gloss.
Proponents: C. F. Keil (1868): Tsemach is "simply a proper name of the Messiah", as "my servant David" in Ezekiel; D. Guzik (Isa 4:2; 11:1; Jer 23:5; 33:15) · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets, vol. 2 (Clark's Foreign Theological Library); Zechariah 3 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
The Branch is Zerubbabel; 3:8b is a later gloss
PreteristHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: Zerubbabel was already in Jerusalem and working, so he could not be "brought"; the clause was added by a later reader; 6:12 originally crowned Zerubbabel as the Shoot and was recast for Joshua.
Proponents: H. G. Mitchell (1912), following Marti · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary)
"Not by might … but by my Spirit": Zerubbabel's hands will finish the house (Zech 4:6–10)
Zechariah 4:6–10 · Zechariah's night visions (24 Shebat, Darius year 2; Zech 1:7–6:8)
The great mountain will become a plain before Zerubbabel; he will bring out the capstone; his hands laid the foundation and will finish the house; let no one despise the day of small things.
Identified in the text: The completion is tied to a named person and a known building; the text gives no date.
Fulfilled when the Temple was completed under Darius (515 BC)
PreteristHistorical narrativeMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: Zerubbabel is named and the house is the Temple then under construction. Historical evidence: Ezra 6:15 records completion in Adar of Darius's sixth year, with the elders prospering through Zechariah's prophesying (6:14). Objection: Ezra 6 does not name Zerubbabel at the completion.
Proponents: Ezra 6:14–15 (text); D. Guzik · Sources: Zechariah 4 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
"The man whose name is the Branch" shall build the temple; a priest on his throne (Zech 6:9–15)
Crowns made from the exiles' silver and gold are set on Joshua's head with the words: the man whose name is the Branch will branch out and build the LORD's temple, bear royal honour and rule on his throne; there will be a priest on his throne, and the counsel of peace between them both; those far off will come and build.
Identified in the text: The text names Joshua as the one crowned (MT) and the Branch as the builder; the two figures are not equated explicitly.
Joshua's crowning typifies the Messiah, priest and king in one
MixedTraditional ChristianMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: a royal crown ('aṭārâ) did not belong to the high priest, so the act signifies one who will "be a priest on his throne"; "speak to him" is singular (Keil). The Branch builds a temple that Guzik reads as God's people (Eph 2:19–22). Objection: Mitchell holds that the original text crowned Zerubbabel.
Proponents: C. F. Keil (1868): a typical act pointing to a man who would combine royalty and priesthood; Zerubbabel must not be interpolated; D. Guzik: the King-Priest Jesus (cf. Ps 110:4; Heb 7) · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets, vol. 2 (Clark's Foreign Theological Library); Zechariah 6 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Zechariah crowned (or meant to crown) Zerubbabel as the Branch; the text was altered to Joshua
PreteristHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: Zechariah and Haggai expected Zerubbabel to build the temple and fulfil the Messianic hopes (Zech 4:9; Hag 2:23); crowning Joshua would contradict them. A scribe adjusted the text when no Davidide ruled again and the high priest became head of the community. Historical evidence: Zerubbabel disappears from the record.
Proponents: H. G. Mitchell (1912), with Wellhausen · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary)
Jerusalem restored; fasts become feasts; the nations seek the LORD (Zech 8)
The LORD will return to Zion; old and young will fill Jerusalem's streets; he will gather his people from east and west; the seed will prosper; the fasts of the 4th, 5th, 7th and 10th months will become feasts; many peoples will come to seek the LORD in Jerusalem, and ten men from the nations will grasp a Jew's robe saying "God is with you".
Identified in the text: The text gives no time-frame beyond "in those days" (8:23).
Fulfilled ultimately in the Messiah's future (millennial) reign in Jerusalem
FuturistDispensationalMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: nations streaming to Jerusalem and the gathering of Israel exceed anything in the Persian period. Objection: the passage also addresses the builders of 518 directly (8:9–13).
Proponents: D. Guzik; C. L. Feinberg (as cited by Barker, via Guzik) · Sources: Zechariah 8 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
The nations come to God through the Jew Jesus (Christian, spiritual fulfilment)
IdealistTraditional Christian
Textual reasoning: "a Jew" read of Christ, through whom the nations approach God. Objection: the plural "Jews" context (8:13, 23) speaks of the people.
Proponents: J. M. Boice (via Guzik) · Sources: Zechariah 8 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Prisoners of hope; "your sons, O Zion, against your sons, O Greece"; Judah and Joseph regathered (Zech 9:11–11:3)
Prisoners are freed by the blood of the covenant; the LORD bends Judah and Ephraim as his bow against the sons of Greece and defends them; he will punish the shepherds, strengthen Judah and save Joseph, bringing them back from Egypt and Assyria to Gilead and Lebanon; Lebanon's cedars and Bashan's oaks wail.
Identified in the text: Javan (Greece) is named as the enemy.
Begun in the Maccabean wars against the Seleucid Greeks; completed in the final subjugation of the world-power
MixedTraditionalMachine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the sons of Javan are the Graeco-Macedonian world-power (cf. Dan 8:21); weak beginnings in the Maccabean wars, but 9:14–15 point beyond them. Objection: Mitchell holds "your sons, O Greece" to be a gloss.
Proponents: C. F. Keil (1868), noting Jerome's report of Jewish readings; D. Guzik (partly Maccabean, ultimately future) · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets, vol. 2 (Clark's Foreign Theological Library); Zechariah 9 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Written under Ptolemy III (247–222 BC); "O Greece" a gloss
PreteristHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: captives in the East and in Egypt (9:11; 10:10) and a hopeful national spirit reflect the hopes fostered by Alexander and the Ptolemies down to Philadelphus; Mitchell's summary dates the passage to the reign of Ptolemy III (247–222); the words naming Greece break the rhythm and are a later gloss.
Proponents: H. G. Mitchell (1912) · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary)
The burden on Hadrach, Damascus, Tyre and Philistia (Zech 9:1–8)
The word of the LORD rests on Hadrach and Damascus, Hamath, Tyre and Sidon; Tyre, though rich and fortified, will be burned; Ashkelon, Gaza, Ekron and Ashdod will be humbled and a remnant of Philistia will belong to God like a clan in Judah; the LORD will encamp about his house so that no oppressor passes through again.
Identified in the text: No agent of the judgment is named.
Predicts Alexander's march through Syria, Phoenicia and Philistia (333–332 BC)
PreteristTraditional (predictive)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the cities are named in the order of Alexander's advance after Issus. Historical evidence: Parmenio seized Damascus; Tyre fell in 332 after a long siege; Gaza was stormed (Arrian; Josephus). Objection (Koehler, via Keil): the conversion of the Philistine remnant (9:7) was not fulfilled by Alexander, so Keil treats his campaign only as the beginning of a longer fulfilment.
Proponents: E. W. Hengstenberg (as quoted by Keil); C. F. Keil (1868), as the "commencement" of fulfilment with Koehler; D. Guzik ("most see") · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets, vol. 2 (Clark's Foreign Theological Library); Arrian, Anabasis of Alexander 2.11–2.27 (trans. E. J. Chinnock, 1884); Josephus, Antiquities 11.7.1–11.8.4 (trans. W. Whiston); Zechariah 9 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Written in 333 BC, just after Issus, as Alexander advanced
PreteristHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: Tyre is described as never yet taken, as it had not been when Alexander attacked it; 9:8 is an interpolation by a reader who knew the story that Alexander spared Jerusalem (cf. Josephus, Ant. 11.8.5). The first part was "fulfilled in a measure" when Alexander took the cities.
Proponents: H. G. Mitchell (1912), following Kuiper · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary); Josephus, Antiquities 11.8.5 (trans. W. Whiston)
The shepherd allegory: the staffs Favour and Union; thirty pieces of silver thrown to the potter; the worthless shepherd (Zech 11:4–17)
The prophet shepherds the flock doomed to slaughter with two staffs, Favour and Union; he removes three shepherds in one month, breaks Favour, asks for his wages and is paid thirty pieces of silver, which the LORD tells him to throw "to the potter" in the house of the LORD; he breaks Union, severing Judah and Israel; then he takes the gear of a foolish shepherd, and woe is pronounced on the worthless shepherd.
Identified in the text: "The handsome price at which they valued me" — the LORD speaks of the wage as his own valuation.
Fulfilled in the betrayal of Jesus for thirty pieces of silver and the purchase of the potter's field
MixedTraditional Christian (New Testament citation)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the shepherd's wages, called the LORD's own valuation, are the price for which the Messiah was sold; the money thrown in the temple and used for the potter's field. Keil treats Matthew's "Jeremiah" as pointing to Jer 18–19 (with Hengstenberg and Kliefoth). Objection: Mitchell sees no strict fulfilment and calls the attribution to Jeremiah a plain misattribution, as Mark 1:2 cites Malachi as Isaiah.
Proponents: Matt 26:15; 27:3–10 (text); C. F. Keil (1868); D. Guzik · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets, vol. 2 (Clark's Foreign Theological Library); Zechariah 11 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
A parable of the Greek period: Ptolemy III as shepherd, the Tobiad tax-farmers as traders
PreteristHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: a different author from 9:1–11:3 (prose, first person, changed vocabulary); written soon after Raphia (217); the shepherd is the king of Egypt "appraised" at a slave's price by Syria's tax-gatherers; breaking Union is the Tobiad civil strife. The text of 11:13 should read "treasury" for "potter". Matthew's use recalls the words rather than fulfilling them.
Proponents: H. G. Mitchell (1912) · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary)
"Your king comes to you … lowly, and riding on a donkey" (Zech 9:9–10)
Daughter Zion is to rejoice: her king comes, righteous and having salvation, lowly and riding on a donkey, a colt; chariot, horse and battle bow will be cut off, he will speak peace to the nations, and his dominion will be from sea to sea.
Identified in the text: The king is not named.
Fulfilled in Jesus's entry into Jerusalem
MixedTraditional Christian (New Testament citation)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: Matthew and John cite the verse of Jesus's entry; Keil holds that Jesus arranged the entry to fulfil it and that the universal peace of 9:10 belongs to the kingdom he founded. Objection: Mitchell notes that Matthew follows the Greek and has two animals where the Hebrew parallelism means one.
Proponents: Matt 21:1–11; John 12:12–16 (text); C. F. Keil (1868); D. Guzik · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets, vol. 2 (Clark's Foreign Theological Library); Zechariah 9 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
An ideal Messianic king, prompted by Alexander's appearance; the evangelists cite it freely
IdealistHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: the humble king without chariots contrasts with Jer 22:4; the author saw in Alexander the forerunner of a Davidic ruler; the second part "was not fulfilled, but it furnished an ideal".
Proponents: H. G. Mitchell (1912) · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary)
Jerusalem a cup of reeling and a burdensome stone for the nations (Zech 12:1–9)
The nations besiege Jerusalem and Judah, but Jerusalem becomes a cup of staggering and a heavy stone; the LORD strikes the horses with panic, the clans of Judah become like a fire pot among wood, the feeble become like David and David's house like God.
A future assault of the nations on Jerusalem, repelled by God
FuturistDispensational
Textual reasoning: "all the nations of the earth" gathered against Jerusalem and supernaturally repelled has not happened; Jerusalem's unique place in God's plan.
Proponents: D. Guzik · Sources: Zechariah 12 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Apocalyptic hope of a Greek-period writer
IdealistHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: chs. 12–14 (except 13:7–9) come from a fourth, apocalyptic writer of about the same time as 11:4–17 (soon after Raphia, 217 BC), presenting the situation optimistically.
Proponents: H. G. Mitchell (1912) · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary)
"They will look to me whom they have pierced" and the great mourning (Zech 12:10–14)
The LORD pours on David's house and Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication; they look to "me whom they have pierced" and mourn for him as for an only son; the mourning is like that of Hadad-rimmon in the valley of Megiddo, every clan apart and their wives apart.
Identified in the text: The text shifts from "me" to "him"; the pierced one is not named.
Fulfilled first at the crucifixion of Jesus (John 19:37), completed when Israel turns to him
MixedTraditional Christian (New Testament citation)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the shift from "me" to "him" shows one essentially one with the LORD yet personally distinct — the Angel of the LORD incarnate (Keil); John cites the verse of the spear-thrust. Objection: Mitchell argues the piercing lies in the past relative to the writer, so it cannot be the future Messiah.
Proponents: John 19:34–37; Rev 1:7 (text); C. F. Keil (1868); D. Guzik · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets, vol. 2 (Clark's Foreign Theological Library); Zechariah 12 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
A past martyr or martyrs (perhaps read through the Servant of Isa 53)
PreteristHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: the outpouring is future but the piercing already happened; no known individual fits (Zechariah son of Jehoiada, Uriah, Gedaliah are too remote); perhaps godly persons killed late in the Persian period, or the Servant of Isaiah taken as a historical martyr — as later Jews spoke of "Messiah son of Joseph".
Proponents: H. G. Mitchell (1912) · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary)
A fountain for sin; the end of false prophecy; "Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered" (Zech 13)
A fountain is opened for David's house and Jerusalem for sin and impurity; idols and prophets are removed, and a would-be prophet will deny his calling; the sword is called against "my shepherd, the man who is my companion": strike the shepherd and the sheep scatter; two-thirds perish, a third is refined and says "The LORD is my God".
Fulfilled in Jesus's arrest and the scattering of the disciples
MixedTraditional Christian (New Testament citation)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: Jesus applies 13:7 to his arrest and the disciples' flight; "the man who is my companion" implies one equal with the LORD (Guzik); Keil sees the turning of God's hand to the little ones realised first in the apostles. Objection: Mitchell holds that the shepherd is the object of the LORD's indignation (continuing ch. 11) and that Jesus's use is illustrative, not a strict fulfilment.
Proponents: Matt 26:31–32; Mark 14:27 (text); C. F. Keil (1868); D. Guzik · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets, vol. 2 (Clark's Foreign Theological Library); Zechariah 13 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
The worthless shepherd of ch. 11, punished
PreteristHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: 13:7–9 continues 11:4–17 (same author, soon after Raphia); "my shepherd" and "my companion" designate the ruler against whom the LORD's sword is called.
Proponents: H. G. Mitchell (1912) · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary)
The day of the LORD: Jerusalem taken, the Mount of Olives split, living waters, the nations keep Booths (Zech 14)
The nations gather against Jerusalem and half the city goes into exile; the LORD fights for it, his feet stand on the Mount of Olives, which splits east to west; the people flee as from the earthquake in Uzziah's days; living waters flow east and west; the LORD becomes king over all the earth; the nations' survivors go up yearly to keep the Feast of Booths; "Holy to the LORD" on the horses' bells.
A literal future return of the Messiah to the Mount of Olives and a millennial reign
FuturistDispensational
Textual reasoning: the siege of AD 70 lacks the deliverance described; the feet on the Mount of Olives are literal (cf. Acts 1:11–12; Rev 19:14); the nations keep Tabernacles in the millennium.
Proponents: D. Guzik · Sources: Zechariah 14 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
Figurative picture of the consummation of God's kingdom
IdealistTraditional (Keil)
Textual reasoning: the living water is, as in Joel 3:18 and Ezek 47, a figure of salvation flowing from the centre of God's kingdom; the exaltation of Jerusalem is figurative like that of the temple mountain (Isa 2:2).
Proponents: C. F. Keil (1868) · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets, vol. 2 (Clark's Foreign Theological Library)
Apocalyptic vision of a Greek-period writer; the Uzziah earthquake comparison a gloss
IdealistHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: the original described the stopping of a spring; a glossator added the comparison with the flight before the earthquake in Uzziah's days — the earthquake of Amos 1:1, which Josephus links with Uzziah's intrusion into the temple.
Proponents: H. G. Mitchell (1912) · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary); Antiquities of the Jews, Book IX, chapter 10, §4 (trans. William Whiston)
"I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the LORD" (Mal 4:4–6)
Remember the law of Moses given at Horeb; the LORD will send Elijah before the great and terrible day, to turn the hearts of fathers to children and children to fathers, lest he strike the land with a curse.
Fulfilled in John the Baptist, who came in the spirit and power of Elijah
MixedTraditional Christian (New Testament citation)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: Jesus identifies John as "Elijah who is to come", and Luke speaks of John in the spirit and power of Elijah, turning fathers' hearts to children. Objection: John himself denied being Elijah (John 1:21); Smith reads the verses as expecting Elijah in person and as a later gloss.
Proponents: Matt 11:14; 17:10–13; Luke 1:17 (text); C. F. Keil (1868); D. Guzik (figuratively in John; completely before the second coming) · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets, vol. 2 (Clark's Foreign Theological Library); Malachi 4 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
A later gloss expecting Elijah himself, taken up in Jewish eschatology
IdealistHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: vv. 5–6 reopen a closed subject and view the day differently (all classes need purification); they probably reflect a later, Hellenising age; Elijah was chosen perhaps because he escaped death; the first known reference to him as forerunner (cf. Enoch 90; the Gospels).
Proponents: J. M. P. Smith (1912) · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary)
"I will send my messenger … and the Lord will suddenly come to his temple" (Mal 3:1–5)
The LORD sends his messenger to prepare the way; the Lord whom they seek, the messenger of the covenant, will suddenly come to his temple; he is like a refiner's fire and launderer's soap, purifying the sons of Levi, and will come near in judgment against sorcerers, adulterers, perjurers and oppressors.
Identified in the text: The messenger is not named here; 4:5 names Elijah as the one sent before the day of the LORD.
The messenger is John the Baptist; the Lord who comes to his temple is Jesus
MixedTraditional Christian (New Testament citation)Machine-proposedIn owner review queue
Textual reasoning: the Gospels apply 3:1 to John; Keil argues for a concrete earthly messenger, the Elijah of 4:5, sent immediately before the Lord's coming, noting that no prophet arose between Malachi and John. Objection: Smith holds that the messenger's identity was assumed known to contemporaries and that the passage is best read through 4:5 as Elijah himself.
Proponents: Matt 11:10; Mark 1:2; Luke 7:27 (text); C. F. Keil (1868); D. Guzik · Sources: Biblical Commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets, vol. 2 (Clark's Foreign Theological Library); Malachi 3 — Enduring Word Bible Commentary
A forerunner expected by the prophet's contemporaries — most naturally Elijah (cf. 4:5)
IdealistHistorical-critical
Textual reasoning: a preliminary work by the LORD's agent before the day of the LORD appears only here and in 4:5–6; the figure is borrowed from royal heralds; interpretations range from John the Baptist to the line of the prophets or a play on the prophet's name.
Proponents: J. M. P. Smith (1912) · Sources: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (International Critical Commentary)
Proposed fulfillments linked to researched events
Isaiah 39:7 → Proposed fulfillment → Training of Judean youths at the Babylonian court (Dan 1:3–7, 17–20)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Traditional Jewish and Christian interpreters; noted as possible by J. J. Collins (1984)
Isaiah's word that Hezekiah's descendants would be "eunuchs in the king of Babylon's palace" is read as fulfilled in the royal youths of Dan 1:3. Collins (via Wikipedia) notes the possible connection without treating it as the inspiration.
Nebuchadnezzar's dream and Daniel's interpretation (Dan 2:1–45) → Prophecy reference → The four kingdoms and the everlasting kingdom (Dan 2:36–45)
MixedBiblical textProposed by: The text itself (Daniel 2:36–45)
The interpretation given in the narrative (2:36–45).
Luke 20:18 → Prophecy reference → The four kingdoms and the everlasting kingdom (Dan 2:36–45)
MixedInterpretationProposed by: Christian interpreters, e.g. D. Guzik (stone = Messiah)
Jesus' saying about the stone that crushes whoever it falls on is read by many Christian interpreters as alluding to the stone of Dan 2:34–35, 44–45.
Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the great tree and Daniel's interpretation (Dan 4:4–27) → Prophecy reference → The decree of the watchers against the king (Dan 4:19–27)
PreteristBiblical textProposed by: The text itself (4:19–27)
Daniel's interpretation within the narrative.
Belshazzar's feast and the writing on the wall (Dan 5:1–29) → Prophecy reference → MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN (Dan 5:24–28)
PreteristBiblical textProposed by: The text itself (5:24–28)
The inscription and its interpretation within the narrative.
Isaiah 45:1–7 → Proposed fulfillment → Fall of Babylon to Cyrus (October 539 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: D. Guzik; traditional Christian interpretation
Guzik reads Isaiah's naming of Cyrus and the opening of gates before him (Isa 44:28–45:7) as fulfilled in the capture of Babylon.
Jeremiah 51:57 → Proposed fulfillment → Fall of Babylon to Cyrus (October 539 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: D. Guzik
Guzik reads Jeremiah's oracle that Babylon's princes would be made drunk and "sleep a perpetual sleep" as fulfilled at the feast and fall.
The four kingdoms and the kingdom of the saints (Dan 7:17–18, 23, 27) → Proposed fulfillment → Neo-Babylonian Empire
MixedInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome; Driver; Newton; Guzik
First beast = Babylon, by parallel with Dan 2:38 (head of gold = Nebuchadnezzar); accepted by every interpreter consulted. Not stated in Dan 7.
The four kingdoms and the kingdom of the saints (Dan 7:17–18, 23, 27) → Proposed fulfillment → Median kingdom (Media)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Ephrem Syrus; Ewald, Bleek, Delitzsch; Driver (1900)
Second beast = Media in the Grecian scheme.
The four kingdoms and the kingdom of the saints (Dan 7:17–18, 23, 27) → Proposed fulfillment → Achaemenid Persian Empire
MixedInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome; Driver; Guzik
Second beast (Medo-Persia, Roman scheme) or third beast (Persia, Grecian scheme).
The four kingdoms and the kingdom of the saints (Dan 7:17–18, 23, 27) → Proposed fulfillment → Macedonian empire of Alexander the Great
MixedInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome; Porphyry; Driver
Third beast (Roman scheme) or fourth beast with its successors (Grecian scheme; Porphyry).
The four kingdoms and the kingdom of the saints (Dan 7:17–18, 23, 27) → Proposed fulfillment → Rome (Republic and Empire)
HistoricistInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: 2 Esdras; Hippolytus; Jerome; Newton; Guzik
Fourth beast = Rome in the traditional scheme (2 Esdras 12:11 onward).
The ten horns and the little horn: time, times and half a time (Dan 7:8, 20–26) → Proposed fulfillment → Antiochus IV Epiphanes
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Porphyry (via Jerome); Driver (1900) and the critical tradition
Little horn = Antiochus IV in the Grecian scheme, matching the little horn of ch. 8.
The ten horns and the little horn: time, times and half a time (Dan 7:8, 20–26) → Proposed fulfillment → Seleucid empire
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Driver (1900); Delitzsch; Ewald
Ten horns = Seleucid kings (several reconstructions).
The ram, the goat and the four kingdoms (Dan 8:3–8, 20–22) → Proposed fulfillment → Alexander the Great
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Josephus; Jerome; Driver; Guzik
The great horn, "the first king" of Greece (8:21), is Alexander.
The little horn and the king of fierce face (Dan 8:9–12, 23–25) → Proposed fulfillment → Antiochus IV Epiphanes
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Josephus; Jerome; Driver; Montgomery; Guzik (near fulfillment)
The little horn / king of fierce face is Antiochus IV.
The little horn and the king of fierce face (Dan 8:9–12, 23–25) → Proposed fulfillment → Rome (Republic and Empire)
HistoricistInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: I. Newton (1733)
The goat's little horn is Rome (historicist).
2,300 evenings and mornings until the sanctuary is cleansed (Dan 8:13–14, 26) → Proposed fulfillment → Rededication of the Temple by Judas Maccabaeus (25 Chislev 148 SE, 165/164 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome; Driver; Guzik
The cleansing of the sanctuary after 2,300 evenings and mornings is the rededication of 25 Chislev 148 SE.
Cyrus the LORD's shepherd and anointed (Isa 44:24–45:13) → Proposed fulfillment → Cyrus's proclamation permitting the return and the rebuilding of the Temple (Ezra 1; 6:3–5)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Josephus; Guzik; Skinner (all, on different dating premises)
Cyrus says of Jerusalem "She will be built" and frees the exiles (Isa 44:28; 45:13) — fulfilled in his first-year decree (Ezra 1:1–4).
Cyrus the LORD's shepherd and anointed (Isa 44:24–45:13) → Proposed fulfillment → Fall of Babylon to Cyrus (October 539 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Guzik (with Herodotus)
Doors and gates opened before Cyrus (Isa 45:1–2) — Babylon's capture in 539 (Herodotus's river-gate account).
The seventy weeks (Dan 9:24–27) → Proposed fulfillment → Cyrus II (the Great)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Driver (Graetz and Bevan: Jeshua instead)
"An anointed one, a prince" (9:25) is Cyrus, called the LORD's anointed in Isa 45:1.
The seventy weeks (Dan 9:24–27) → Proposed fulfillment → Onias III
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Driver; Montgomery
"An anointed one … cut off" (9:26) is the murdered high priest Onias III.
The seventy weeks (Dan 9:24–27) → Proposed fulfillment → Antiochus IV Epiphanes
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Driver; Montgomery
"The prince who comes" and the one who stops the sacrifice (9:26–27) is Antiochus IV.
The seventy weeks (Dan 9:24–27) → Proposed fulfillment → Rome (Republic and Empire)
MixedInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Newton; Guzik; Eusebius and "the Hebrews" (per Jerome)
"The people of the prince who comes" who destroy city and sanctuary (9:26) are the Romans (AD 70).
The seventy weeks (Dan 9:24–27) → Proposed fulfillment → Luke 19:37–40
FuturistInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Anderson; Guzik
The sixty-nine weeks end "unto Messiah the Prince" at Jesus' entry into Jerusalem (6 April AD 32 in Anderson's reckoning).
The seventy weeks (Dan 9:24–27) → Proposed fulfillment → Luke 23:44–46
MixedInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Newton; Africanus (per Jerome); Miller
"The Anointed One will be cut off" (9:26) is the crucifixion of Jesus.
The seventy weeks (Dan 9:24–27) → Prophecy reference → Cyrus's proclamation permitting the return and the rebuilding of the Temple (Ezra 1; 6:3–5)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Driver (as the 7-week mark); Eusebius, Clement (per Jerome)
Cyrus's decree as the "going out of the word" or as the end of the first seven weeks.
The seventy weeks (Dan 9:24–27) → Prophecy reference → Artaxerxes' decree to Ezra in his seventh year (Ezra 7)
HistoricistInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Newton; Miller
Artaxerxes' decree to Ezra (458/457) as the start of the 490 years.
The seventy weeks (Dan 9:24–27) → Prophecy reference → Artaxerxes sends Nehemiah to rebuild Jerusalem, Nisan of his twentieth year (Neh 2:1–8)
FuturistInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Africanus (per Jerome); Anderson; Guzik
Artaxerxes' commission to Nehemiah (445/444) as the start of the 69 weeks.
Jeremiah's seventy years (Jer 25:11–12; 29:10; read in Dan 9:2) → Proposed fulfillment → Fall of Babylon to Cyrus (October 539 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Driver; Guzik
Jeremiah's seventy years end with Babylon's fall (Jer 25:12).
Jeremiah's seventy years (Jer 25:11–12; 29:10; read in Dan 9:2) → Proposed fulfillment → Cyrus's proclamation permitting the return and the rebuilding of the Temple (Ezra 1; 6:3–5)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: 2 Chronicles 36:22; Ezra 1:1 (text); Driver
Cyrus's first-year proclamation accomplishes Jeremiah's word.
Jeremiah's seventy years (Jer 25:11–12; 29:10; read in Dan 9:2) → Proposed fulfillment → The rebuilt Temple completed on 3 Adar of Darius's sixth year (Ezra 6:15)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Zechariah 1:12 (text); Jerome
The seventy years of the Temple's desolation end with its completion in Darius's sixth year.
The princes of Persia and Greece and Michael (Dan 10:13, 20–21) → Proposed fulfillment → Macedonian empire of Alexander the Great
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome
The coming of "the prince of Greece" (10:20) corresponds to Alexander's Macedon overthrowing Persia.
Four kings of Persia; the fourth stirs up all against Greece (Dan 11:2) → Proposed fulfillment → Xerxes I
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome; Newton; Driver; Guzik
The rich fourth king who stirs up all against Greece (11:2) is Xerxes I.
A mighty king and the fourfold division of his kingdom (Dan 11:3–4) → Proposed fulfillment → Alexander the Great
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome; Newton; Driver; Guzik
The mighty king whose kingdom is divided to the four winds (11:3–4) is Alexander the Great.
The kings of the south and the north (Dan 11:5–20) → Proposed fulfillment → Ptolemaic kingdom (Egypt)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Porphyry and Jerome; Newton; Driver; Guzik
"The king of the south" (11:5–20) is the Ptolemaic dynasty of Egypt.
The kings of the south and the north (Dan 11:5–20) → Proposed fulfillment → Seleucid empire
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Porphyry and Jerome; Newton; Driver; Guzik
"The king of the north" (11:6–20) is the Seleucid dynasty.
The kings of the south and the north (Dan 11:5–20) → Proposed fulfillment → Berenice (Syra)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome; Newton; Guzik
"The daughter of the king of the south" (11:6) is Berenice, married to Antiochus II.
The kings of the south and the north (Dan 11:5–20) → Proposed fulfillment → Ptolemy III Euergetes
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome; Newton; Guzik
"A shoot from her roots" (11:7) is her brother Ptolemy III.
The kings of the south and the north (Dan 11:5–20) → Proposed fulfillment → Battle of Raphia: Ptolemy IV defeats Antiochus III (217 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome; Driver; Guzik
The southern victory of 11:11–12 is Raphia (217 BC).
The kings of the south and the north (Dan 11:5–20) → Proposed fulfillment → Battle of Panium: Antiochus III defeats Scopas (c. 200–198 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome; Driver
The northern capture of a fortified city and the glorious land (11:15–16) is Antiochus III's victory at Panium and the siege of Sidon.
The kings of the south and the north (Dan 11:5–20) → Proposed fulfillment → Cleopatra I
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome; Driver; Guzik
"The daughter of women" (11:17) is Cleopatra I, given to Ptolemy V.
The kings of the south and the north (Dan 11:5–20) → Proposed fulfillment → Battle of Magnesia: Rome defeats Antiochus III (190 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome; Driver; Guzik
The commander who ends his reproach (11:18) is Lucius Scipio at Magnesia.
The kings of the south and the north (Dan 11:5–20) → Proposed fulfillment → Seleucus IV Philopator
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome; Driver; Newton
The raiser of taxes destroyed "not in battle" (11:20) is Seleucus IV, killed by Heliodorus's conspiracy.
The contemptible person (Dan 11:21–35) → Proposed fulfillment → Antiochus IV Epiphanes
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Porphyry; Driver; Montgomery; Guzik
The contemptible person (11:21–35) is Antiochus IV.
The contemptible person (Dan 11:21–35) → Proposed fulfillment → Onias III
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Driver
"The prince of the covenant" broken (11:22) is the high priest Onias III, deposed in 175.
The contemptible person (Dan 11:21–35) → Proposed fulfillment → Popillius Laenas orders Antiochus IV out of Egypt at Eleusis (168 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Jerome; Driver
The "ships of Kittim" (11:30) are the Roman envoys under Popillius Laenas at Eleusis (168 BC).
The contemptible person (Dan 11:21–35) → Proposed fulfillment → Desecration of the Temple: the "abomination of desolation" (15 Chislev 145 SE, 168/167 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Porphyry; Driver; Montgomery; Josephus
"The abomination that makes desolate" (11:31) is the pagan altar of 15 Chislev 145 SE.
The contemptible person (Dan 11:21–35) → Proposed fulfillment → Mattathias
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Porphyry (per Jerome)
"A little help" (11:34) is Mattathias and his sons.
The contemptible person (Dan 11:21–35) → Proposed fulfillment → Rome (Republic and Empire)
HistoricistInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Newton; Jewish teachers (per Jerome)
The "arms" that profane the sanctuary (11:31) are the Romans.
The king who exalts himself (Dan 11:36–45) → Proposed fulfillment → Death of Antiochus IV at Tabae in Persia (164 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Driver; Montgomery; Porphyry
The king's end with no one to help (11:45) is the death of Antiochus IV (164 BC).
A time, times and a half; 1,290 and 1,335 days (Dan 12:7, 11–12) → Proposed fulfillment → Death of Antiochus IV at Tabae in Persia (164 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Driver (after Cornill)
The end of the 1,290 days from the desecration coincides roughly with the death of Antiochus IV (164 BC).
A time, times and a half; 1,290 and 1,335 days (Dan 12:7, 11–12) → Proposed fulfillment → Rededication of the Temple by Judas Maccabaeus (25 Chislev 148 SE, 165/164 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Porphyry (via Jerome)
The 1,335th day marks the cleansing of the Temple after victory over Antiochus's generals.
Michael, the time of trouble and the resurrection (Dan 12:1–3) → Proposed fulfillment → Rededication of the Temple by Judas Maccabaeus (25 Chislev 148 SE, 165/164 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Porphyry (via Jerome)
The "awakening" of 12:2 is the Maccabean loyalists' return to victory, read metaphorically.
The man of God from Judah against the altar of Bethel: "Josiah by name" (1 Kgs 13:1–3) → Proposed fulfillment → Josiah desecrates Jeroboam's altar at Bethel and the high places of Samaria
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: 2 Kings 23:16 (text); Josephus
A son of David named Josiah would burn bones on Jeroboam's altar (1 Kgs 13:2) — stated as fulfilled in 2 Kgs 23:16.
Huldah's oracle: judgment on Jerusalem; Josiah gathered in peace (2 Kgs 22:15–20) → Proposed fulfillment → Nebuzaradan burns the Temple and Jerusalem (5th month of Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Josephus; Keil; Guzik
The evil announced on "this place" (2 Kgs 22:16–17) — the burning of Jerusalem and the Temple.
Huldah's oracle: judgment on Jerusalem; Josiah gathered in peace (2 Kgs 22:15–20) → Proposed fulfillment → Josiah killed at Megiddo by Necho II (609 BC)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Keil; Lumby; Guzik
"Gathered to your grave in peace … your eyes will not see all the evil" (2 Kgs 22:20) — Josiah's death in 609, before the catastrophe.
"Not by might … but by my Spirit": Zerubbabel's hands will finish the house (Zech 4:6–10) → Proposed fulfillment → The rebuilt Temple completed on 3 Adar of Darius's sixth year (Ezra 6:15)
PreteristInterpretationIn owner review queueProposed by: Ezra 6:14–15 (text); Guzik
"His hands shall also finish it" (Zech 4:9) — the Temple completed in Darius's sixth year (Ezra 6:15).
Extracted prophetic passages not yet researched
These are extraction records only (Rule 01).
- 2 Kings 22:14–20 — Huldah's oracle: judgment on Jerusalem; Josiah spared Prophetic oracle
- 2 Chronicles 34:22–28 — Huldah's oracle (Chronicles) Prophetic oracle
- 2 Chronicles 36:20–21 — Servitude until Persia; the land's sabbaths fulfil seventy years Historical narrative
- Isaiah 44:1–5 — The Spirit poured on Jacob's offspring Poetry
- Isaiah 44:21–23 — Israel redeemed; the heavens sing Poetry
- Isaiah 44:24–28 — The LORD who says of Cyrus "He is my shepherd" Prophetic oracle
- Isaiah 45:1–7 — Cyrus the LORD's anointed: doors and gates opened Prophetic oracle
- Isaiah 45:8 — Heavens rain righteousness Poetry
- Isaiah 45:9–13 — Woe to the clay that quarrels with the potter; Cyrus will build my city Prophetic oracle
- Isaiah 45:14–17 — The nations come to Israel: "God is with you" Prophetic oracle
- Isaiah 45:18–25 — Turn to me and be saved; every knee shall bow Poetry
- Jeremiah 25:8–11 — Nebuchadnezzar "my servant" against the land; seventy years of servitude Prophetic oracle
- Jeremiah 25:12–14 — After seventy years Babylon will be punished Prophetic oracle
- Jeremiah 25:15–29 — The cup of the wine of wrath for the nations; Sheshach drinks last Prophetic oracle
- Jeremiah 25:30–38 — The LORD roars from on high against all flesh Poetry
- Daniel 4:10–18 — The great tree and the watcher's decree (dream content) Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 7:2–7 — Four beasts from the great sea Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 7:8 — The little horn with eyes and a boasting mouth Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 7:9–12 — The Ancient of Days and the heavenly court; the beast destroyed Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 7:17–18 — The interpretation: four kings; the saints receive the kingdom Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 7:19–27 — The fourth beast, ten horns and little horn explained Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 8:3–4 — The ram with two horns Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 8:5–8 — The goat from the west; the great horn broken; four horns Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 8:9–12 — The little horn against the host, the prince and the sanctuary Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 8:26 — The vision is true; seal it up for many days Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 9:24 — Seventy weeks are decreed on your people and your holy city Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 9:25 — From the going out of the word to an anointed one, a prince: seven weeks and sixty-two weeks Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 9:26 — An anointed one cut off; the people of a coming prince destroy city and sanctuary Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 9:27 — A firm covenant for one week; sacrifice ceases in the middle; the abomination that desolates Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 10:4–9 — The man clothed in linen by the Tigris Apocalyptic vision
- Daniel 12:11–12 — 1,290 days from the removal of the continual offering; blessed who reaches 1,335 Apocalyptic vision
- Amos 1:2 — The LORD roars from Zion Prophetic oracle
- Amos 1:3–5 — Oracle against Damascus Prophetic oracle
- Amos 1:6–8 — Oracle against Gaza and the Philistines Prophetic oracle
- Amos 1:9–10 — Oracle against Tyre Prophetic oracle
- Amos 1:11–12 — Oracle against Edom Prophetic oracle
- Amos 1:13–15 — Oracle against Ammon Prophetic oracle
- Haggai 2:1–9 — Second oracle (21/VII): be strong and work; the latter glory greater than the former Prophetic oracle
- Haggai 2:10–19 — Third oracle (24/IX): holiness does not spread, uncleanness does; "from this day I will bless you" Prophetic oracle
- Zechariah 1:7–17 — First night vision: the rider among the myrtles; "these seventy years"; comfort for Jerusalem Apocalyptic vision
- Zechariah 2:6–13 — Oracle: flee from the land of the north and from Babylon; the LORD will dwell in Zion; many nations joined to him Prophetic oracle
- Zechariah 3:1–7 — Fourth night vision: Joshua the high priest accused and cleansed Apocalyptic vision
- Zechariah 4:1–5 — Fifth night vision: the golden lampstand and two olive trees Apocalyptic vision
- Zechariah 4:11–14 — The two olive branches explained: the two anointed ones Apocalyptic vision
- Zechariah 8:1–8 — Restoration oracles: the LORD returns to Zion; old and young in the streets; the people gathered Prophetic oracle
- Zechariah 8:9–17 — Let your hands be strong: blessing since the foundation was laid Prophetic oracle
- Zechariah 8:18–23 — The fasts of the 4th, 5th, 7th and 10th months become feasts; nations seek the LORD Prophetic oracle
- Zechariah 9:11–17 — Prisoners of hope; Judah and Ephraim as the LORD's bow against the sons of Greece; the LORD appears over them Prophetic oracle
- Zechariah 10:1–12 — Against the teraphim and the shepherds; from Judah the cornerstone, tent peg and battle bow; Judah and Joseph strengthened and regathered from Egypt and Assyria Prophetic oracle
- Zechariah 11:1–3 — Lament of the cedars of Lebanon, the oaks of Bashan and the shepherds Prophetic oracle
- Zechariah 13:1–6 — A fountain opened for sin and impurity; idols and false prophets removed Prophetic oracle
- Zechariah 13:7–9 — "Awake, O sword, against my shepherd": the shepherd struck, the sheep scattered; a third refined Prophetic oracle
- Zechariah 14:1–5 — The day of the LORD: Jerusalem taken; the LORD fights; the Mount of Olives split; flight as from the Uzziah earthquake Prophetic oracle
- Zechariah 14:6–15 — One unique day; living waters east and west; the LORD king over all the earth; Jerusalem raised and secure; plague on her attackers Prophetic oracle
- Zechariah 14:16–21 — The nations go up yearly to keep the Feast of Booths; "Holy to the LORD" on the bells of the horses Prophetic oracle
- Malachi 3:1–6 — My messenger prepares the way; the Lord comes suddenly to his temple; refiner's fire; judgment on sorcerers and oppressors Prophetic oracle
- Malachi 3:13–18 — The godly speak together; the book of remembrance; a distinction between righteous and wicked Prophetic oracle
- Malachi 4:1–3 — The day burning like a furnace; the sun of righteousness with healing in its wings Prophetic oracle