The four horns of the altar were as much a part of the atonement as the ram and goat. So when Daniel saw four horns from a sacrificial animal, he undoubtedly thought again of the temple services. Then, when a new horn arose, this picture of his dearly held memory was cruelly twisted. The little horn was a vile distortion of the sacred ordinances. As we will see shortly, this is no accident.

23 "And in the latter period of their rule, When the transgressors have run their course, A king will arise...

First, we must look at the word used: "king".

21 "And the shaggy goat represents the kingdom of Greece, and the large horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

In 8:21, Gabriel is referring to a person with "the first king". In the rest of this vision, the most natural reading of the context would indicate that phrases like "a king will arise" refer to a new kingdom. This usage can be clearly seen in chapter 7 where in verse 17, the word "kings" is used, and verse 22 makes it clear that the "kings" are actually kingdoms. The little horn power comes at the "latter period" of the remnants of Alexander's empire.

We have already learned in Chapters 2 and 7 that the only significant power after Greece was Rome. This power should then appear to be the same one we have studied, with attributes similar to the fearful fourth beast and the legs of iron. Just as God spent the bulk of the prior visions on Rome, the bulk of this vision is devoted to Rome.

(Some expositors insist on identifying this kingdom as a single king, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the eighth of twenty Seleucid kings, and a notorious oppressor of the Jews. In the interest of intellectual honesty, we will spend time later discussing this incorrect conclusion.)

The key to the time of arrival of the power is the phrase "...When the transgressors have run their course..." Literally translated, this would be "when the transgressions have come to the full". Which transgressions would these be? The syntax of the text gives us three players: the four horns ("their rule"), "transgressors", and a "king".

The transgressors must be people other than the Greek kings. Given the fact that this is toward the end of Greek dominion, "transgressors" can only refer to the Jews and their rejection of God's plan for them. The little horn power has yet to run its course before the time of the end, so we cannot be looking at the transgressions of later sinners or of the little horn.

God's focus in prophecy makes the identification of the transgressors easy. While the evils of Israel's neighbors are the subject of divine punishments from time to time, God's attention is almost always directed to His chosen people and their failure to follow His laws. For a prophecy dealing with the "holy ones" and the "Commander of the host" to suddenly shift focus away from God's people would be totally out of character. The "transgressors" must be God's chosen people who have rejected God. Isaiah confirms this identification.

5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. Is 53:5-8 (KJV)

History confirms our conclusion. In 170BC, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Syrian king, began a campaign to exterminate the Jewish religion and identity. He had the High Priest assassinated. Then he ordered all Jews to renounce their religion on pain of death. Most Jews readily went along with his demands, and left the true God. Only when a remnant of faithful Jews under Judas Maccabeus revolted did they succeed in throwing off the Syrian yoke.

Shortly after this, Judas Maccabeus died, and in 161BC, the Jews signed a treaty with Rome, forming the Jewish League. Palestine became a Roman protectorate, and, as was common with such protectorates, shortly became subservient to Rome. The final subjugation of the Jews to Rome occurred with the Roman invasion in 63BC.

This matches the prophecy perfectly. Even though there were twelve Syrian kings after Antiochus IV Epiphanes, he was the last to rule over Palestine. This is "the latter period of their rule". The level of transgression was "full", with the bulk of the people very ready to give up their faith. Finally, Rome, under the guise of a "defensive" alliance, conquered Palestine without a fight. This clearly constitutes "skill... in intrigue".

23 "And in the latter period of their rule, When the transgressors have run their course, A king will arise Insolent and skilled in intrigue.

The final peak of the Jewish transgression came at the crucifixion of Jesus and the stoning of Stephen. Rome was the power in control by then. The Jews had fixed themselves in their disobedience to God. The "transgressors ha(d) run their course," and Rome ascended the stage.

An interesting light is added to the word "transgressors" when we look at the original Hebrew. The word translated "transgressors" is pasha` (6586). It can also be translated "rebels". The transgressors are those who rebel against God's plan. What better picture can be drawn of the legalistic Jews who subverted the divine plan of redemption for their own personal gain, and finally crucified the savior!

9 And out of one of them came forth a rather small horn which grew exceedingly great toward the south, toward the east, and toward the Beautiful Land.
10 And it grew up to the host of heaven and caused some of the host and some of the stars to fall to the earth, and it trampled them down.
11 It even magnified itself to be equal with the Commander of the host; and it removed the regular sacrifice from Him, and the place of His sanctuary was thrown down.
12 And on account of transgression the host will be given over to the horn along with the regular sacrifice; and it will fling truth to the ground and perform its will and prosper.

It's instant replay time. This looks like a carbon copy of the little horn in chapter 7, but it seems to start at a different time. In Chapter 7, the little horn growing out of the fourth beast perpetrated all the evil, but was primarily focused toward the remnants of the Roman empire. Here it seems to start sooner.

This little horn "grew exceedingly great toward the south, toward the east, and toward the Beautiful Land." This refers to conquest. Clearly, Rome matches. It came from the west, and conquered "east" (Turkey and Syria), "south" (Egypt), and the "Beautiful Land" (Palestine).

23 "And in the latter period of their rule, When the transgressors have run their course, A king will arise Insolent and skilled in intrigue.
24 "And his power will be mighty, but not by his own power, And he will destroy to an extraordinary degree And prosper and perform his will;...

Rome is pictured as being fierce and scheming. This is clearly a match. Rome was so feared that many local rulers ceded their lands to Rome to avoid being attacked. These "Roman legacies" were often achieved without any real military threat. Also, some sovereigns called on Rome for assistance (like the Jews), and Rome subverted the treaties to make those areas subservient to Rome, hence the reference (already discussed) to "intrigue." Note the relative strength of the three kingdoms:

Ram "magnified himself"
gadal (1431)

Goat "magnified himself exceedingly"
m@'od ad hagdowlaah (3966 5704 1419)

Little horn "grew exceedingly great"
watigdal (1431)

"magnified itself to be equal with the Commander of the host"
"he will destroy to an extraordinary degree And prosper and perform his will" (emphasis added)
shachath pala' (7843 6381) (literally: surpassing, extraordinary to a degree which is difficult to understand)

This progression of strength indicates that this last kingdom will be stronger than all the others. Only Rome matches. But what is this in verse 10?

10 And it grew up to the host of heaven and caused some of the host and some of the stars to fall to the earth, and it trampled them down.

Let's call on Gabriel for help.

24 "And his power will be mighty, but not by his own power, And he will destroy to an extraordinary degree And prosper and perform his will; He will destroy mighty men and the holy people.

The degree of destruction will be beyond anything in history. Obviously, the brutal Roman conquests qualify. But later, in the Inquisition, Papal Rome outdoes itself. Various commentators have placed the death toll of God's faithful between 100 and 200 million. No power before or since comes close.

"(N)ot by his own power" clearly implies the assistance of an outside agency. Since we have already identified the little horn to be Rome, there is only one outside power available: Satan. This very neatly fits the unfolding picture. God is spending a great deal of time telling Daniel about the worst persecutor of His people, and it is only logical that the power behind the throne would be Satan. This is, after all, the story of the Great Controversy between God and Satan.

Later, as we see the Papacy emerge, the presence of an outside power can refer to both Satan and the Papacy's manipulation of political entities for its own benefit. For the moment, however, we are looking at pagan Rome.

10 And it grew up to the host of heaven and caused some of the host and some of the stars to fall to the earth, and it trampled them down.

It seems like we could not possibly be looking at an earthly power in verse 10, since it looks like the little horn is reaching into heaven. Once again, Gabriel provides the explanation.

24 ...He will destroy mighty men and the holy people.

Verse 10 is just an echo of language Daniel knew from his study of the scriptures.

4 "When Pharaoh will not listen to you, then I will lay My hand on Egypt, and bring out My hosts, My people the sons of Israel, from the land of Egypt by great judgments. Ex 7:4

The figurative language really refers to the little horn's actions against nations and God's people on Earth. Rome destroyed many a king and general with its military prowess. The Roman oppression of the Jews beginning with Nero and Tiberius led to the death of millions of Jews. Christians were not exempt. Rome brutally oppressed the early Christian church, executing anyone who kept the Sabbath. Since the church became Israel under the new covenant, first hereditary, then spiritual Israel are "the holy people".

It's time for a brief Hebrew lesson (again). Verses 9 and 10 are written in the feminine gender. Verses 11 and 12 switch to the masculine gender. What does this mean? Daniel has shifted focus slightly. He is still talking about the little horn, but now he's talking about another aspect of it. It's like shifting from "she" to "he". It's a new perspective. We have been looking at Pagan Rome. Now we shift to Papal Rome.

It should not be forgotten that this is exactly what happened in chapter 7. Pagan Rome was represented by the terrible fourth beast. But the scene changed when the little horn came up among the other ten. Each vision amplifies the one before it. And the pattern of events is the same, just with more detail.

11 It even magnified itself to be equal with the Commander of the host; and it removed the regular sacrifice from Him, and the place of His sanctuary was thrown down.
12 And on account of transgression the host will be given over to the horn along with the regular sacrifice; and it will fling truth to the ground and perform its will and prosper.

We saw in chapter 7 how the Papacy "magnified itself to be equal with the Commander of the host". But what is this statement: "it removed the regular sacrifice from Him, and the place of His sanctuary was thrown down"?

The first thing we see is that the "regular sacrifice" was removed from "Him", that is, from God. The word "sacrifice" has been added by the translators, since they felt that it was the only word that fit. The Hebrew only contains the word hattamid (8548), which may be translated "always", "daily", "continual", or "perpetual". Since this "continual" (whatever) belongs to God, it seems reasonable to infer that it does represent the daily sacrifice. But how can this be? By the time the Papacy enters the stage, the daily sacrifice has been abolished by Christ's death on the cross! Perhaps we should call it the continual "services" until we define them further.

The next clause defines the situation a bit further. The little horn caused "the place of His sanctuary (to be) thrown down." Once again, the reference is a bit less than obvious. At the time of the Papacy, there is no longer any sanctuary on the earth. Have we been misled in identifying the little horn as Rome and the Papacy? No, we just haven't looked in the right place. We need to find a sanctuary in the church era! Hebrews 8 fills in the missing piece.

1 Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,
2 a minister in the sanctuary, and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man. Heb 8:1-2

The temple is in heaven. But wait a minute! We already said that the Papacy can't literally reach into heaven. The Hebrew helps us out again. The word translated "place' is makon (4349). This word can also be translated "foundation". What is the foundation of the heavenly sanctuary? It can't be literal bricks and mortar.

The foundation of the original sanctuary was the mediatorial action of the priests. Sinners did not make their confession directly to God, but instead presented sacrifices for the priest to offer. The sin was transferred to the priest and temple. These sacrifices were made daily, in the morning and evening. Annually, the high priest officiated at the day of atonement ceremony, where he went directly into the presence of God in the holy of holies, and the sins were cleansed.

In the same manner, we have a mediator and advocate: Jesus Christ, our high priest who became sin for us (2 Cor 5:21). In Hebrews 8 we see this.

6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises. Heb 8:6

In 1 Tim 2:5, "the mediator" is clearly identified as the only mediator:

5 For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 1 Tim 2:5 (emphasis added)

25 Hence, also, He is able to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them. Heb 7:25

The Papacy, in order to be the little horn's second aspect, must "throw down" the ministry of Jesus in the heavenly sanctuary. Once again, we have a match. Just a few of the ways that the Papacy throws down the ministry of Jesus are:

• The confessional, where the penitent confesses his sins to a priest, not to God. The priest then claims to intercede for the penitent before God. This separates the sinner from his Savior.

  16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need. Heb 4:16 (KJV)

• The doctrine of intercession of the "Holy Virgin Mary". Pope John Paul II calls for her "powerful intercession" in his preface to the current Catholic Catechism. There is no scriptural evidence (although it is quite reasonable to assume) that she was saved. Our only direct evidence of her holy character is found in Luke 1:28 where Gabriel addresses Mary as "Favored One." The conclusion of her life and her saved status is not recorded. But even if she was saved, she cannot intercede, as we have seen in 1 Tim 2:5.

• The doctrine of intercession of the saints. The Catholic Church determines who they are, then declares that they intercede for us in heaven. There is no scriptural basis for the Catholic Church to have this authority. As noted before, we have only one intercessor, Jesus Christ.

• During the period of Papal supremacy, 538 to 1798, the people were forbidden on penalty of death to read the Bible. Even the priests were discouraged from reading it.

When literal Israel confessed its sins, daily sacrifices were literally offered at the tabernacle in the desert, then later at the temple. When Christ was crucified,

50 And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit.
51 And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom Matt 27:50-51

At that moment, the need for animal sacrifices ended. (Although the Jews continued the ritual until the Temple was destroyed in AD70.) We now have a better sacrifice. Hebrews 9 says:

24 For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;
25 nor was it that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood not his own.
26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. Heb 9:24-26

Christ has no need of daily sacrifices. He is the only sacrifice. So what is the "daily service" which the little horn "removed"? It is the foundation of our faith, the intercession of Jesus Christ for our sins. The usurpation of the service of mediation and intercession by the Papacy is a "throwing down" of the "place of His temple."

I can hear the screams now. Wait! You are making an analogy which goes far beyond scripture! You must find something else to fulfill this action. Let us look into the OT. Isaiah, speaking as inspired by God, condemns the wickedness of Israel. He reviles their sacrifices. Even their observance of holy days is more than God can stand because of their evil ways. He summarizes their depravity.

12 "When you come to appear before Me, Who requires of you this trampling of My courts? Is 1:12

The earthly defilement of heavenly ordinances is referred to as a "trampling of (heavenly) courts". We have only repeated the statement of Isaiah in another form. Allow me reiterate our understanding. The only purpose for the sanctuary is for Jesus to intercede for sinners. When they call on Him, He presents His sacrifice on the cross to the Father as full and complete payment for their sins. No other intercession is needed or possible.

The Papacy instituted the confessional with its claim of the right to forgive sin. In it the penitent confesses his sins to a priest who "grants absolution" and assigns a penance. This is a direct obstruction of the sinner's access to the mediatorial ministry of Jesus. By setting itself up as a rival intercessor, the Papacy reaches into the vital core of divine activity. It is an attack on the foundation of the sanctuary, and it is an attack on God

But the Papacy is not content to interpose a single interference to the sinner's access to the savior. Mary is placed in the way as well. A few quotes will suffice to illustrate this.

"Mary is called the 'gate of heaven, because no one can enter that blessed kingdom without passing through her'". "God wills… that we should have nothing that has not passed through the hands of Mary".

"That it is most useful and holy to have recourse to the intercession of Mary can only be doubted by those who have not faith. But that which we intend to prove here is that the intercession of Mary is even necessary to salvation; we say necessary – not absolutely, but morally. This necessity proceeds from the will itself of God, that all graces that he dispenses should pass through the hands of Mary…"

"We most readily admit that Jesus is the only Mediator of justice, according to the distinction just made, and that by his merits he obtains us all graces and salvation; but we say that Mary is the mediatress of grace…"

"Meaning, that we more easily find salvation by having recourse to the Mother than by going to the Son – not as if Mary was more powerful than her Son to save us, for we know that Jesus Christ is our only Saviour, and that he alone by his merits obtained and obtains salvation for us; but it is for this reason: that when we have recourse to Jesus, we consider him at the same time as our judge, to whom it belongs to chastise ungrateful souls, the therefore the confidence necessary to be heard may fail us; but when we go to Mary, who has no other office that to compassionate us as Mother of mercy, and to defend us as our advocate, our confidence is more easily established, and is often greater. We often obtain more promptly when we ask by calling on the name of Mary than by invoking that of Jesus. Her Son is lord and judge of all, and discerns the merits of each one; and therefore if he does not immediately grant the prayers of all, he is just. When, however, the Mother's name is invoked, though the merits of the suppliant are not such as to deserve that his prayer should be granted, those of the Mother supply that he may receive." Alphonsus de Liguori ("Saint" of the Roman Catholic Church) in "The Glories of Mary"

The quotes could continue endlessly. They are found in Papal letters, bulls, and conciliar pronouncements. After sorting through the mountain of verbiage, several facts may be established:

• The Roman Catholic Church emphasizes the judicial duties of Christ in a western sense, as a prosecuting judge. This ignores the proper Jewish understanding where Jesus acts as our advocate. The RCC uses mountains of verbiage to dance around the truly exclusive status of Jesus, but only states a distinction without a difference.

• Because we have to fear this vengeful judge, Mary acts to "stay His hand". She is the moderating mother for the temperamental Son.

• Because of Mary's wonderful work in keeping Jesus in line, we can call on her, and she will give us what we need. The RCC again dances around this, claiming that Mary only asks things which are in God's will, but still states that God answers her demands in the affirmative.

• If our merits aren't enough (salvation by works!) then Mary adds to them "her merits" so that our requests will receive favorable consideration.

• When God grants Mary's requests (in which He has no choice), Mary then hands out the benefits.

There is no Biblical support for any Marian doctrine. They exist solely on the authority of the church.

Put simply, if Mary truly does the things the RCC claims, then everything must go through her, both in the petition, and response. This means that the sinner now has an earthly impediment to his access to the Savior, and a heavenly one as well. His requests must go through a priest, then Mary before reaching the Savior. The RCC is not content to impede the sinner, it forces him into idolatry. We must remember that Jesus is our advocate. We do not need any other help.

1 My little children, I am writing these things to you that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; 1 John 2:1

We have no need for a priest or Mary. We may draw near to Christ for help without fear, because He deals gently. He can sympathize with us, because He was once one of us.

15 For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin.
16 Let us therefore draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and may find grace to help in time of need.

1 For every high priest taken from among men is appointed on behalf of men in things pertaining to God, in order to offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins;
2 he can deal gently with the ignorant and misguided, Heb 4:15-5:2a

All of the glorious claims for Mary fall flat on the Word of God. They serve only as a way to divert us from the wonderful grace of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

8 "I am the LORD, that is My name; I will not give My glory to another, Is 42:8a

11 "For My own sake, for My own sake, I will act; For how can My name be profaned? And My glory I will not give to another. Is 48:11

All the other Papal doctrines, such as Papal authority by apostolic succession, Sunday observance, and the canonization of saints merely extend this core blasphemy. The intercession of Jesus for sinners is the foundation of all faith, and the Papacy thinks to make this of no effect. This false ministry will come to its final end by the action of God, not man. Perhaps Gabriel puts it best in verse 25.

25 "And through his shrewdness He will cause deceit to succeed by his influence; And he will magnify himself in his heart, And he will destroy many while they are at ease. He will even oppose the Prince of princes, But he will be broken without human agency.

But does simply preaching a false doctrine constitute fulfilling the prophecy? Something more is needed. In 538, the Papacy achieved temporal authority. All those who believed in the Gospel of Jesus as taught by the Inspired Word were subject to the death penalty. Other churches may teach incorrect doctrine, but none has combined blasphemy with this degree of temporal authority. The Papacy is clearly the second aspect of the little horn.

In verse 13, Daniel is switched from vision to audition; from seeing to hearing. Up till now, Daniel has been seeing fantastic beings and events. From here on, the book is explanation. And just as the visions were revisited and expanded from chapter 2 to chapter 7 and then chapter 8, the explanations will be revisited and expanded from chapter 8 to chapter 9 and then in chapters 11 and 12.

13 Then I heard a holy one speaking, and another holy one said to that particular one who was speaking, "How long will the vision about the regular sacrifice apply, while the transgression causes horror, so as to allow both the holy place and the host to be trampled?"

A subtle but important distinction appears here in the Hebrew, but not in the English. When one angel asks about the "vision" in verse 13, the word hazon (2377) is used. This is also the word in verses 15, 17, and part of 26. The other word used for "vision" is mar'eh (4758). This is used in verses 26 and 27. Hazon refers to "what is beheld", while mar'eh refers to "what is perceived". If Daniel was simply referring to the vision, he would not have used different words. As we will see, he had a very important distinction to make by using two different terms.

The form of the question "How long will the vision about the regular sacrifice apply?" is a very common one in Hebrew thought. When will it be over? Perhaps David demonstrates this best in Psalm 13.

1 For the choir director. A Psalm of David. How long, O LORD? Wilt Thou forget me forever? How long wilt Thou hide Thy face from me?
2 How long shall I take counsel in my soul, Having sorrow in my heart all the day? How long will my enemy be exalted over me?
3 Consider and answer me, O LORD, my God; Enlighten my eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death, Psa 13:1-3

The rest of verse 13 about "the transgression caus(ing) horror" and the "trampling" of the "holy place" and "host" is expansion. The focus of the question is the "regular ('services')". We should note that once again the word "sacrifice" not in the original and is supplied by the translator. The word tamid (8548) (a form of hattamid) is used. As before, it may be translated "always", "daily", "continual", or "perpetual".

The continual services of Jesus are the focus of the angel's question. "The transgression caus(ing) horror", and the "trampling" of God's people and the "holy place" are things that happen during the usurpation of the regular services. They are intimately related to it, but may end before or after the end of the time of the vision about the regular services.

Gabriel's response leaves Daniel baffled:

14 And he said to me, "For 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the holy place will be properly restored."

It should not be surprising that Daniel did not understand the answer, because it appears that Gabriel did not answer the question that was asked! In fact, Gabriel did answer the question, but the link between what Gabriel was asked and what he answered will not become apparent until we study chapter 9. In verse 26 we begin to understand Daniel's confusion because Gabriel says:

26 "And the vision(audition) (mar'eh) of the evenings and mornings Which has been told is true; But keep the vision (hazon) secret, For it pertains to many days in the future."

Hazon refers to the vision of the ram, goat, and little horn. Mar'eh refers to audition of the 2,300 days.

Is this 2,300 days, or is it 1,150 days (count one each for each morning and evening)? The translators have added the word "and" to verse 14. The original Hebrew was "evenings/mornings" (ereb boqer) (1242 6153). Without the "and", we have 2,300 (something's). Daniel 8:14 and 26 are the only places in the Bible that use this specific form. A closely related form is found in Genesis 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, and 31, in the story of creation.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. Gen 1:5 (KJV)

In Genesis the form way hi-ereb way hi-boqer (1961 6153 1961 1242) ("there were evenings there were mornings") clearly refers to singular days. Unfortunately, verse 26 says "the vision of the evenings and mornings... is true". This can allow either 2,300 evenings, and 2,300 mornings; or 2,300 evenings and mornings, or 1,150 days. The language is ambiguous. In fact, 2,300 days is correct, but we will have to wait a bit to explore that fact more fully.

But is this literal or prophetic (year for a day) time?

15 And it came about when I, Daniel, had seen the vision (hazon), that I sought to understand it; and behold, standing before me was one who looked like a man.
16 And I heard the voice of a man between the banks of Ulai, and he called out and said, "Gabriel, give this man an understanding of the vision(mar'eh)."
17 So he came near to where I was standing, and when he came I was frightened and fell on my face; but he said to me, "Son of man, understand that the vision(hazon) pertains to the time of the end."

Once again, we find an apparently non-sequitur answer. Daniel is told that the vision "pertains to the time of the end", which is certainly many years away. But he gets no help on the audition. The 2,300 days are a mystery. We will find out much more when we study the audition of chapter 9. Meanwhile, it is possible for us to explore just what is being discussed, even if the "when" is not yet determined.

The word nisdaq (6663) translated "properly restored" is also translated "cleansed" (KJV), "reconsecrated" (NIV), or "vindicated". While all of these translations are linguistically acceptable and give the general thought of restoring the sanctuary to its proper status and function, the King James translation of "cleansed" would be one which the Jews would have recognized as having special meaning. In fact, Jewish translators used the Greek word for "cleansed" here when they translated the Hebrew OT into the Greek Septuagint in the 2^nd century B.C.

Every day, the children of Israel offered sacrifices for their sins. The priest sprinkled blood from the sacrificed animal before the veil separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place. Annually, on the Day of Atonement, the High Priest entered the Most Holy Place to present the year's sins for cleansing. (A full study of this is far beyond this study of prophecy. Detail can be found in Lev 16 and Heb 7-10.) This was the "cleansing of the sanctuary". All of the Hebrew people would understand this instantly in the prophecy. It is very likely that this is what Daniel understood.

At the same time, Daniel would also have known that the other meanings, "properly restored", and "vindicated" were also correct. Nisdaq is a polyvalent word. All three meanings are most likely intended at once. The day of atonement blends into a broader view.

This more complete understanding is that of a sanctuary which has been fouled by the most desecrating sacrilege possible. When it is "nisdaqed", the sacrilege is removed, the sanctuary is restored to its proper function, and its standing as the proper place and manner of worship is vindicated. The presence of the "transgression caus(ing) horror" before the sanctuary is nisdaq shows that this broader explanation is far more correct than limiting "nisdaq" to a "day of atonement"..

We have already seen that in the church era our sanctuary is in heaven.

1 The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven,
2 and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man.
3 Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer.
4 If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law.
5 They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven... Heb 8:1-5

When Jesus died on the cross, the earthly sanctuary services were finished as far as God was concerned.

50 And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.
51 At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. Matt 27:50-51

Until this time, no one was allowed to look into or enter the Most Holy Place. It was the most sacred place on earth, and the center of the Atonement. The High Priest was allowed to enter, but only on the Day of Atonement. By tearing the curtain between the Holy and Most Holy places, God allowed anyone to look into the Most Holy Place at any time. The first covenant with the Hebrews in Genesis 12:2-3 was replaced with the new covenant with spiritual Israel seen in Galatians 3:29. With the new covenant, we gain a new high priest, a new sacrifice, and a new sanctuary in heaven. What a beautiful picture! In Hebrews 9:

11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation;
12 and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. Heb 9:11-12

We still have to deal with the other items mentioned in verse 13, the "transgression caus(ing) horror" and the "trampling" of the holy place and host. The word pesa (6588) translated "transgression" is the Old Testament's most profound word for sin. The word somem (8074) translated "horror" has a root usage of horror, devastation or desolation of the sanctuary, or divinely decreed judgement. The phrase "transgression caus(ing) horror" expresses an appalling horror which desolates the sanctuary through religious and cultural transgression.

Given the context we have developed regarding the sanctuary and the little horn, it is clear that this transgression causing horror is a result of the Papacy establishing a counterfeit system of ministry and mediation, of which the confessional is the centerpiece.

The "trampling" of the sanctuary and host is a result of this counterfeit ministry. We should note that with the termination of the Papacy's political power, the Papacy is no longer able to "destroy to an extraordinary degree". The "trampling" of the host has diminished as Christians have studied the scriptures and claimed Christ as their mediator. Unfortunately, those who still attend the confessional continue to be victims of "trampling."

Just as the sanctuary was fouled by the vile act of substituting a false ministry, it had to be restored by the act of restoring the true ministry. And just because the actual fouling occurred on earth, the restoration must also occur on earth. This has in fact happened, as believers have studied the Word kept from them by the Papacy. We now know that Jesus is our only intercessor, and that we do not need any earthly help getting our prayers heard in the heavenly courts. The glory of the gospel once again belongs to the people of God!

16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need. Heb 4:16 (KJV)

Gabriel continues to fill in details.

25 "And through his shrewdness He will cause deceit to succeed by his influence; And he will magnify himself in his heart, And he will destroy many while they are at ease. He will even oppose the Prince of princes, But he will be broken without human agency.

The Papacy has done everything predicted for it. But it still remains. Daniel is given the final message of hope, "he will be broken without human agency." No time is given, only the fact that, just as the stone of chapter 2 "was cut out without hands", the little horn will be "broken without human agency." God will prevail.

26 "And the vision(audition) (mar'eh) of the evenings and mornings Which has been told is true; But keep the vision (hazon)secret, For it pertains to many days in the future."
27 Then I, Daniel, was exhausted and sick for days. Then I got up again and carried on the king's business; but I was astounded at the vision (mar'eh), and there was none to explain it.

Finally, Gabriel reassures Daniel that the audition of the 2,300 days is true. He doesn't know when the 2,300 days begins. And neither do we, until we look at the next installment in Daniel 9. In the meantime, Daniel is to keep the vision (hazon) secret.

Based on the use of hazon and mar'eh, distinguishing vision from audition, it seems fair to say that Daniel understood the vision of the beasts and little horn. After all, it followed the pattern he had seen and apparently understood in chapter 7. But the discussion of 2,300 days was totally baffling. He had been very familiar with the temple and its services when taken from Jerusalem to Babylon. He longed for the restoration of Jerusalem and the temple.

Here Daniel sees a time which appears to be just over six years in length for the purification of the temple. Yet, as Daniel wrote down the vision (and audition), he knew that the temple had been completely destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. How could six years allow for rebuilding the temple, then its pollution and restoration? Is it any wonder that he did not understand it? After all, it had taken Solomon twenty years just to build the temple! (2 Chron 8:1)

Now, as promised, we take an intermission. Numerous interpreters have identified the little horn of chapter 8 as Antiochus IV Epiphanes. This is incorrect, but since so many people make the same mistake, it is essential to examine him and show how he does not fit.