Cambyses & Daniel 11:40-45

Brother Jeff,

I want to quote you a passage from a book written by William Shea titled Daniel, A Reader’s Guide. It was published in 2005. Elder Shea was a member of the Biblical Research Department and the Daniel and Revelation Committee, (DARCOM). He is now retired. What is interesting in this passage from the book is his comparing the history of Cambyses with verses forty through forty-five of Daniel eleven. This parallel history is in agreement with Sister White’s statement in Manuscript Releases, volume 13, page 394:

“We have no time to lose. Troublous times are before us. The world is stirred with the spirit of war. Soon the scenes of trouble spoken of in the prophecies will take place. The prophecy in the eleventh of Daniel has nearly reached its complete fulfillment. Much of the history that has taken place in fulfillment of this prophecy will be repeated.”

“One major question to consider is how much continuity exists between this passage and what has gone before. A direct continuity would suggest that the king of the north in this final passage is the same papal power that we have seen featured prominently in verses 23–39 of Daniel 11. If the connection is not quite so direct, then some other power could be involved. This volume takes the position that the connection between this final passage and the rest of the prophecy is quite direct. Therefore, we should identify the king of the north in verse 40–45 with the papal phase of Rome—the same power that has been the central focus of the preceding section of the prophecy.

“The king of the south appears briefly at the beginning of this section, but then takes a back seat as a minor actor. Earlier in this chapter, the title, ‘king of the south,’ referred to Egypt from which the Ptolemies came. But here at the end of chapter 11 the identification seems to be more spiritual than political. Thus just as the king of the north has become the papacy and is no longer a territorial king in the literal sense in which chapter 11 presents him at its beginning, so the king of the south is also a spiritual entity here in these last six verses of the chapter. Although in the twentieth century, the papacy does own a small piece of territory—Vatican City—its principle influence is spiritual. That comparison leads us to the conclusion that the king of the south should be seen here more as a philosophical force than a political or territorial power.

“Thus we need to ask, What characteristic of ancient Egypt makes its reappearance here at the time of the end? One characteristic ancient Egypt demonstrated toward the people of God was to reject their God, Yaweh. ‘Who is the Lord, that I should obey him to let Israel go? I do not know the Lord and I will not let Israel go’ Pharaoh declared (Exodus 5:2). In more modern times, this ‘Egyptian’ attitude is expressed in rationalism which in the area of religion has led to atheism or agnosticism. There was a major eruption of this kind of thought in the French Revolution, right at the time when history came to the prophetic ‘time of the end’ in 1798. The atheism expressed in Marxist communism is a direct descendant of the philosophy developed at the time of the French Revolution. It is interesting to note in this setting that the book of Revelation, too, appears to make just such a connection with its symbols. Revelation 11 talks about the two witnesses of God—the Law and the Prophets, or the Old and the New Testaments—who prophesied throughout the long 1,260 day-years period of the Middle Ages. Then at the end of that period, a new power was to arise that would put the witnesses to death, and their slaughtered bodies would lie in the streets of the city for three and a half day-years. This fits very well with the antibiblical actions and sentiments expressed at the height of the French Revolution (1789–1793) in which the Bible was rejected in favor of the goddess of reason. However, we need not limit our understanding of the king of the south in Daniel 11:40–45 to revolutionary France. It might rather be identified as rationalistic humanism—the major philosophical upheaval the French Revolution bequeathed the modern world. That spirit has lived on in communism and in many other aspects of the modern world. And it has been in conflict with the church. Witness the fate of the Catholic Church in Communist countries, especially those behind the previously existing Iron Curtain. As a result, for a time the Soviet Union was the most popular nominee for the end-time king of the south. But with the collapse of communism there has been waning support for that idea.

“We need not see the king of the south in this passage as a literal, territorial France or Russia. Rather, we can view it as embodying the same ideas on the subject of religion as presented in the philosophy of those powers. Rationalistic humanism, leading to atheism or agnosticism, would fit well the actions and attitudes of the king of the south. Revelation 11:8 provides a figurative connection between these ancient and modern attitudes by stating that the bodies of the biblical witnesses would lie ‘in the street of the great city, which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.’

Jesus was crucified again in the philosophical terms and religious expressions of this Egyptian-like ideology that has been perpetuated by Revolutionary France and Russia.

“In summary, the king of the north in the time of the end probably should be connected with the preceding dominant power in prophecy—the papacy of the Middle Ages, now in its final phase. The king of the south, modeled upon anti-Yawehistic attitudes of ancient Egypt, fits well with the modern movement of rationalistic humanism that leads to atheism or agnosticism. In the modern world, revolutionary France and the former Soviet Union have been the special propagators of those ideas. Even though the power and position of these nations have declined somewhat, the spirit of the age which they fostered persists in many places and continues to present a major challenge to the church.

“It appears that Daniel 11:40–45 utilizes an actual historical incident in Persian history as a model, or type, for the spiritual battle between good and evil that will take place in the time of the end. The example comes from the Egyptian campaign of the Persian king Cambyses in 525 B.C. Invaders of Judah and Egypt from the north had come through Syria, which lay to the north, and thus from Judah’s viewpoint, conquerors from that direction ultimately came through Syria. In order to engage the king of the south in Egypt, ‘the king of the North will storm out against him with chariots and cavalry and a great fleet of ships’ (vs. 40a). Cambyses was approaching Egypt by both sea and land, a course that is described in these words, ‘He will invade many countries and sweep through them like a flood’ (vs. 40b). Among these countries would be Judah. ‘He will also invade the Beautiful Land’ (vs. 41a).

“Continuing his course southward toward Egypt, Cambyses bypassed Trans-Jordan and did not attack it as he passed through Judah. As Daniel 11:41b puts it: ‘Many countries will fall, but Edom, Moab, and the leaders of Ammon will be delivered from his hand.’ Cambyses did not bother with these nations as he traveled down the coastal road to the west.

“Cambyses continued on his way to Egypt and conquered it. This victory is brought to view in verse 42: ‘He will extend his power over many countries; Egypt will not escape. He will gain control of the treasures of gold and silver and all the riches of Egypt.’ But Cambyses did not plan to stop with his conquest of Egypt, for the end of verse 43 says that he was going to obtain submission from the Lybians to the west of Egypt and the Nubians to the south of Egypt (the modern Sudan).

“Having gone this far, however, he was to receive dire news from the rear—from the east and the north (vs. 44). This means that the news from the east had traveled west and then had been brought down through Syria and Palestine to reach the king while he was in Egypt. Although historians don’t know what this news was, it clearly upset Cambyses greatly. He set out with his forces in great anger to rectify the situation (vs. 44). As he retracted his road north, he came through Judah again. While passing through that territory, he encamped on his way. The location is given as ‘between the seas toward the beautiful holy mountain’ (vs. 45). He did not come up to the holy mountain, Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he only pitched his tents towards it. His actual campsite location was down on the coastal Plain of Sharon ‘between the seas and the beautiful holy mountain.’ His target was not Jerusalem; he was intent on returning to the north where he had come from and from whence his bad news originated. But while encamped in Judea he was to be overtaken by his end. It would come without any human intervention. It was not to be brought about by battle, and none could help him avert this personal tragedy (vs. 45).

“While Cambyses was encamped in the Plain of Sharon, he died as the result of a self-inflicted wound, stabbing himself in the thigh with his sword. Among modern historians, interpretations of this event differ. Some say it was a suicide attempt; others say it was an accident. Whatever the cause, Cambyses died after twenty days, and none of the troops in his mighty army could help him. Paraphrasing the words of Daniel, he came to his end, but none could help him (vs. 45). The ancients saw this as a punishment of God. Cambyses was seen as a madman by the people of his time, and one more of his mad acts was to kill the sacred Apis bull when he entered Egypt by stabbing it in the thigh. Thus when he struck himself in the same location, whether by accident or intent, this was seen as retributive justice.

“Thus all the events described in Daniel 11:40–45 took place in a literal way in the life, experience, and death of Cambyses the Persian king. But at this point in the course of the prophecy, we are not dealing any longer with ancient times. We are dealing with ‘the time of the end’ (11:40). The powers involved are no longer a literal Persian king and a literal king of Egypt. They have become symbols for the powers at the time of the end. These powers we have identified as the papacy (the king of the north) and atheism (the king of the south). In some way, the religious power of the Roman Church will gain some sort of victory over the forces of atheism before the end of time (vs. 43). But while this power is enjoying the fruits of that short-lived victory, more serious challenges will arise in the east (vs. 44), for the kings of the east will march forth, according to the book of Revelation (Revelation 16:12). The book of Revelation also speaks of that final spiritual battle in literal terms, locating it at Armageddon (16:16), or ‘the mount of Megiddo.’ Megiddo is also located between the seas and the glorious holy mountain. The papacy is one of the spiritual powers that will be involved in that final spiritual battle. “The plain of Sharon is located just south of Megiddo, and that plain leads up to the mountain range of Mount Carmel which intersects Megiddo and the Plain of Sharon. It was on that literal, geographical plain of Megiddo that Cambyses was encamped when he died. It was on the mount itself where, in earlier biblical times, the contest between the true God and the false gods of Baal took place (1 Kings 18). That kind of spiritual struggle will be repeated in modern times, but it will not be a literal, physical struggle upon that geographical mountain (vs. 45). That ancient contest symbolizes the final spiritual conflict that will take place on a worldwide basis. From this final battle, Christ and His heavenly army will emerge victorious. Satan and all his hosts will be defeated in this final great spiritual battle on earth. That battle is described in Revelation 19:11–21. Revelation 16 describes only the preparations for the battle of Armageddon. Revelation 19 describes the actual battle of the great day of God Almighty, and Christ wins! By borrowing from the ancient experience of Cambyses, the course of that battle has been described. This modern Cambyses will fail too, just as the ancient one did.” William Shea, Daniel, A Reader’s Guide, 264–268.

Response

Brother PR,

I am familiar with the repetition of Cambyses’ history in the last six verses of Daniel eleven and believe that it is a valid fulfillment of Sister White’s statement that “much of the history” that “has been fulfilled” within the history of Daniel eleven “will be repeated” when the last six verses of Daniel eleven are fulfilled. I know that Elder Shea has an incorrect view of the “daily” in the book of Daniel and that false premise forces him to conclude that the papacy begins as the king of the north in verse twenty-three; this is incorrect. The papacy becomes the subject of Daniel eleven in verse thirty-one. Prior to that – beginning in verse sixteen and ending in verse thirty – Pagan Rome is the king of the north and the subject of the narrative He obviously does not understand the flow of events in verses forty through forty-five, so he has a limited view of the movement of the atheistic power through the verses. Beyond that I have little problem with his analysis of the history of Cambyses, other than some minor nuances that would probably be resolved if he were but to use the King James Bible as his point of reference.

Of course the most important parallel history is verses thirty through thirty six, which Sister White quotes and then informs us that scenes similar to those described in these words will be repeated. The intelligence between pagan Rome and papal Rome in verse thirty parallels the intelligence that was carried out by Ronald Reagan and the pope in fulfillment of verse forty. Uriah Smith emphasizes that the word translated as “intelligence” in verse thirty represents a “connivance” and he points to the conniving that took place between pagan and papal Rome in order to place the papacy on the throne of the earth in 538. Reagan’s and the pope’s connivance is a parallel and I am amazed that when the historians inform us how the communication between these two men was carried out, that it was accomplished by the director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

In verse thirty-one the arms of Clovis would stand up for the papal power and accomplish three things: pollute the sanctuary of strength (which was the city of Rome); remove the daily (which was the religion of paganism) and place the abomination that maketh desolate (which marked the empowerment of the papacy in 538).

Verse thirty-one identifies that the military might of the United States will stand up for the papacy (as it began to do in the Reagan years starting in verse forty); the United States will pollute its sanctuary of strength (which is marking the overturning of the Constitution at the Sunday law in verse forty-one); the United States will take away the daily (change its religion from Protestantism to apostate Protestantism starting in 1842 and reaching its maturity in verse forty-one); and the United States will place the papacy on the throne of the earth (in verses fortytwo and forty-three).

Verses thirty-two through thirty-five describe the persecutions of the 1,260 years of papal rule and parallel the persecution described in verse forty-four. Verse thirty-six identifies that in spite of the arrogance and self-exaltation of the papal power the deadly wound was determined to be delivered to the papacy in 1798 paralleling the papal demise in verse forty-five as human probation closes and the king of the north comes to his end with none to help.

Another history that is repeated when the last six verses of Daniel eleven are fulfilled is verses sixteen and seventeen of Daniel eleven. Those two verse parallel Daniel 8:9 where we are informed that pagan Rome would overcome three geographical powers as it took control of the world. When we understand that the established rule in Daniel eleven is that when a power conquers Babylon that power becomes the king of the north and that when a power conquers Egypt that power then becomes the king of the south, we can see the history of verses sixteen and seventeen as a parallel to verses forty through forty-three.

When pagan Rome in verse sixteen conquered Syria, which in that history included Babylon it became the king of the north. As the king of the north, pagan Rome then conquered the king of the south by capturing Egypt. Historians including Uriah Smith point out that it would have been difficult if not impossible altogether for Rome to defeat the king of the south in that history had Rome not first formed an alliance with Israel. This alliance parallels the alliance between the pope (the king of the north) and Reagan in verse forty that allowed Rome to once again conquer the king of the south— the former Soviet Union. Once Egypt was under the authority of pagan Rome (the king of the north) it is no longer a king—it has become simply Egypt.

After pagan Rome subdued the king of the south, through the help of God’s chosen people living in the glorious land, then pagan Rome conquered Israel—the glorious land in verse sixteen; paralleling the king of the north’s conquering of the United States at the Sunday law in verse forty-one. After this the rebellion of Anthony and Cleopatra broke out in Egypt and pagan Rome needed to return and once again subdue Egypt, thus paralleling verses forty-two and forty-three.

So pagan Rome first became the king of the north then conquered the king of the south, the glorious land and Egypt—just as the papacy does in verses forty through forty-three.

Another history that has bearing on the correct understanding of the last six verse of Daniel eleven that is repeated is the parallel histories of verse sixteen and seventeen with verses thirty and thirty-two. What I mean by these being parallel histories is that in verses sixteen and seventeen pagan Rome must conquer three geographical powers just as three geographical powers are subdued for the papal power in the history of verse thirty and thirty-one. These two histories parallel the three geographical powers that modern Rome must overcome in verses forty through forty-three.

Also in verse twenty-two we find that pagan Rome would crucify Christ.

“And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant.”

The persecution of Christ by pagan Rome parallels the persecution of Christ by papal Rome in the person of His witnesses in verses thirty-two through thirty-five and both these histories parallel the persecution of verse forty-four.

Daniel eleven is a very profound chapter of prophecy. Jeff.

Published by

Comment on this FAQ