The little horn of Daniel 8 does not symbolize Antiochus Epiphanes, but it does symbolize Rome. To prove this is easy. If people would only treat interpretations of prophecy as they treat bank-bills, that is, compare them with the detector to see if they are genuine, there would be no trouble. Our only wonder is that any one could ever have supposed the application to Antiochus to be genuine.
Why do I say the above??? For very good reason. Please follow....
1. This horn came out of one of the four horns of the goat. Verse 9. It was therefore another horn separate and distinct from any of the four. One of these four horns, as we have seen, was the kingdom of Syria, founded by Seleucus, from whom sprung the famous line of kings known in history as the Seleucidae.
Of these there were twenty-six, in order as follows:- 1. Seleucus Nicator. 2. Antiochus Soter. 3. Antiochus Theus. 4. Seleucus Callinicus. 5. Seleucus Ceraunus. 6. Antiochus the Great. 7. Seleucus Philopater. 8. Antiochus Epiphanes. 9. Antiochus Eupator. 10. Demetrius Soter. 11. Alexander Bala. 12. Demetrius Nicator. 13. Antiochus Theos. 14. Antiochus Sidetes. 15. Zebia. 16. Seleucus, son of Nicator. 17. Antiochus Grypus. 18. Antiochus the Cyzicenian. 19. Seleucus, the son of Grypus. 20. Antiochus Eusebes. 21. Antiochus, second son of Grypus. 22. Philip, third son of Grypus. 23. Demetrius Eucheres. 24. Antiochus Dionysius. 25. Tigranes. 26. Antiochus Asiaticus, who was the last of the Seleucidae, and who, after an insignificant reign of four years, was driven from his dominions by Pompey, the Roman, B.C.
It will thus be seen that Antiochus Epiphanes was simply one of the twenty-six kings who constituted the Syrian horn of the goat. He was for the time being that horn; hence he could not be at the same time a separate and independent power, or another remarkable horn, as the little horn was. Rome was such a separate horn, and, from the stand-point of this prophecy, came out of one of the horns of the goat, thus answering exactly to the prophetic description. In the year 161 B.C., Rome became connected with the Jews by the famous Jewish League, 1 Mac. 8; Josephus' Antiq., b. xii., chap. x., sec. 6; Prideaux, vol. ii., p. 166. Nations are noticed in prophecy when they become connected with God's people. Right here the conquering legions of the Roman power came into the prophet's view. But just seven years before this, B.C. 168, Rome had conquered Macedonia (one of the four horns of the goat), adding it to its empire. And as if coming from that horn, the prophet beholds it from that point pursuing its triumphant career. It is therefore spoken of as coming forth from that horn.
2. Were we to apply the little horn to any one of these twenty-six Syrian kings, it should be to the most illustrious and powerful one of them all. But this was not Antiochus Epiphanes. For historians inform us that his name, Epiphanes, the illustrious, was changed to Epimanes, the fool, on account of his vile and extravagant folly. The little horn cannot apply to Antiochus, but must signify the Roman power, because,
3. This little horn, in comparison with the preceding kingdoms, Media and Persia, waxed "exceeding great." There is in the prophecy a regularly increasing gradation of power: great, very great, exceeding great. Applying the little horn to Antiochus, the following result is presented: 1. "Great," Persia. True. 2. "Very great," Grecia. True. 3. "Exceeding great," Antiochus. Nonsense.
The Persian empire is simply called "great," though it ruled "from India even unto Ethiopia, over an hundred and twenty and seven provinces." Grecia, still more extensive and powerful, is called "very great." Then comes the power in question, which is called "exceeding great."
Was Antiochus great in comparison with Alexander, who conquered the world? or with the Romans, who conquered vastly more than all of Alexander's dominions?? The kingdom of Antiochus was only a portion of the empire ruled by the goat. Is a part more than the whole? Of the relation between Antiochus and the Romans, the Religious Encyclopedia says: "Finding his resources exhausted, he [Antiochus] resolved to go into Persia to levy tributes and collect large sums which he had agreed to pay to the Romans."
Can any king be said to have waxed exceeding great, when he left his kingdom no larger than he found it? But Sir Isaac Newton testifies that Antiochus did not enlarge his dominions. He made some temporary conquests in Egypt, but immediately relinquished them when the Romans took the part of Ptolemy and commanded him to give them up. It surely cannot take any one long to decide which was the greater power, the one which evacuated Egypt or the one which commanded that evacuation; the one compelled to pay tribute, or the one to whom he was compelled to pay it.
One was Antiochus; the other was Rome. With Rome as the third member of the series, we have this result: 1. "Great," Persia. True. 2. "Very great," Grecia. True. 3. "Exceeding great," Rome. More emphatically true than either or both the others.
4. The little horn was to stand up against the Prince of princes, by which title, without doubt, our Lord is meant. But Antiochus died 164 years before Christ was born. There was a power, however, which did stand up against the Saviour. Rome was then in the zenith of its glory. And Rome, in the person of Herod, endeavored to destroy the infant Jesus. Subsequently, when Pilate was its mouth-piece in Judea, it nailed him to the cross. The same work is attributed to the great red dragon of Rev.12, a symbol referring so evidently to Rome that none care to dispute the application. Antiochus answers not one specification of the prophecy; and here we may
therefore dismiss him. But, for a more full elucidation of the prophecy, we may
further say of Rome:-
5. This horn was "little" at first. So was Rome, but it "waxed," or grew, "exceeding great" in three several directions. What better terms could be used to describe the course of that power which from a small beginning rose to be the mistress of the world?
6. It gathered dominion toward the south. Egypt was made a province of the Roman empire B.C. 30, and continued such for over six centuries.
7. It marched its conquering legions toward the east. Rome subjugated Syria B.C. 63, and made it a province of the empire.
8. It set its face toward the pleasant land. Judea is so called in many scriptures. Ps.106:24; Zech.7:14; etc. First by a league of assistance and friendship the Romans took under their influence the holy land and people. They subsequently made Judea a Roman province, and finally destroyed the city of Jerusalem, burned their beautiful temple with fire, and scattered the Jews over the face of the whole earth to be gathered no more till time shall end.
9. It waxed great even to the host of heaven. These terms, used in a symbolic sense in reference to earthly scenes, must denote persons of illustrious character or exalted position. The great red dragon, Rev.12:4, Pagan Rome, is said to have cast down a third part of the stars of heaven to the ground. This is the same power, and we think the same work, referring to its acts of oppressing the Jews and deposing their rulers.
10. By him the daily (not daily sacrifice, as our translators have supplied, but daily desolation, which is paganism) was taken away, and the transgression of desolation, the papacy, was set up.. Chap.11:31. Rome, and Rome alone, did this. While Rome was ruler, the religion of the empire was changed from paganism to that corrupted form of Christianity known as the papacy. And the place where paganism had long had its sanctuary, Rome with its Pantheon, or temple of all the gods, was cast down, or degraded to the second rank, by the removal of the seat of government to Constantinople, in A.D. 330. So in Rev.13:2, the dragon, Pagan Rome, gave to
the beast, Papal Rome, his seat, the city of Rome, and great authority.
11. An host was given him against the daily. The barbarians that subverted the Roman empire became converts to that nominal Christianity before which they were thus brought face to face, and were soon transformed into willing instruments whereby their former religion, paganism, was dethroned. No other power has in any respect fulfilled this prophecy.
12. In the interpretation, verse 23, it is called a king of fierce countenance and understanding dark sentences. Such was emphatically Rome, with its warlike paraphernalia, and its strange language which the Jews did not understand. Moses uses similar language, referring, as all agree, to the Romans. Deut. 28:49,50.
13. It was to stand up in the latter time of their kingdom, when the dominion of the four horns of the goat was drawing to an end. There Rome appeared.
14. It was to destroy wonderfully. Hear all opposing powers, which it so rudely overthrew, testify, Thus did Rome.
15. Rome has destroyed the mighty and holy people, the people of God, more than all other powers combined. A many-tongued voice from the blood of more than fifty millions of martyrs, goes up to testify against it. 16. And it has "practiced,"-practiced its deceptions upon the people, and its schemes of cunning among the nations, to gain its own ends, and aggrandize its
power.
17. And it has "prospered." It has made war with the saints, and worn them out and prevailed against them.
18. It has run its allotted career, and is to be "broken without hand." Verse 25. How clear a reference to the stone cut out without hand which is to smite the image upon its feet and dash it to pieces. So the papacy is soon to perish in the consuming glories of the second coming of our Lord. Thus Rome fulfills all the specifications of the prophecy. No other kingdom meets even one. Rome is the power in question. No other can be.
In view of all these facts, if any one still affirms that Antiochus was the little horn, or if he even hesitates to admit its application to Rome, all we can do is to take such person by the hand, and exclaim, with the deepest commiseration for his unfortunate condition,
"Non compos mentis. Farewell."
