Translations and Daniel 11:37

Dan 11:37 (KJV1611 Edition):
Neither shall hee regard the god of his fathers,
nor the desire of women, nor regard any god:
for he shall magnifie himselfe aboue all.

Daniel 11:37 (The Complete Jewish Bible):
He will show no respect for the gods his ancestors worshipped,
or for the god women worship - he won't show respect for any god,
because he will consider himself greater than all of them.

The statement is about the God of this person:

1. it is not the god of his fathers
2. it is not the god women worship
3. he shows no respect for gods
4. he considres himself greater than other gods

This sentence is NOT about the sexual preference(s) of this person.

 

Just about every version did an acceptable job of translating the verse.

I like the ESV the best but would improve it by noting that "the one" is assumed and not noted in the Hebrew.

Daniel 11:37a
He shall pay no attention to the god of his fathers, or to [the one] beloved by [or 'desire of'] women.
The question should be, "What was the desire of women?"

IMHO, this is a wrong interpretation.

Rob

 

The desire of women

The context of the verse shows it's in reference to GODS and not the AS's desire for women. Remembering that Daniel is writing from his own knowledge, as well as what God showed him, let's see what god many Jewish women desired.

Jeremiah 7:18
"The children gather wood, the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead dough, to make cakes for the queen of heaven; and they pour out drink offerings to other gods, that they may provoke Me to anger."

Jeremiah 44:19
'The women also said,“And when we burned incense to the queen of heaven and poured out drink offerings to her, did we make cakes for her, to worship her, and pour out drink offerings to her without our husbands’ permission?” '

Ezekiel 8:14
"So He brought me to the door of the north gate of the LORD’s house; and to my dismay, women were sitting there weeping for Tammuz."

The 'queen of heaven' is often identified as Ishtar/Astarte and Tammuz as her consort, who died & was later resurrected. Although between Daniel's time and now the Astarte myth has undergone great revision, in Daniel's(and Ezekiel's) time Astarte was identified with the planet Venus and Tammuz was identified with the changing seasons, supposedly being dead from the end of fall harvest to the beginnings of spring. I believe the above Scriptures clearly point to Astarte & Tammuz as being the god desired by women, as it seems that among the Jews, they were worshipped chiefly by women.

Daniel 11:37 begs the question, and other Scriptures answer it.

 

Are you SURE, DC? After all, the phrase about women is placed between phrases saying the AC will regard no god, and the Scriptures from Jeremiah & Ezekiel indicate that the 'queen of heaven' was a 'goddess' especially favored by women at that time.

1 Samuel 9:20 is about a different type of desire. samuel was telling Saul, in so many words, that all Israel desired him to be their king...nothing to do with sexual desire.

And in 2 Samuel 1;26, we know that neither David nor Jonathan was gay; their love was as that of best friends today. I think that suggests that the love of women there was something loved BY women besides a sexual partner.

However, favoring your view is the example of Hitler, who while not gay as were several of his homeboys, placed love of women low on his list of priorities. His one passionate love, for his niece Geli Raubal, was before he came to power, and even that affair took second stage to his political activities. It appears he used Eva Braun as a comforter more than a lover. He never openly acknowledged her as a mistress or even a friend, marrying her, only hours before whacking himself, as a favor for her loyalty instead of from love.

Since I believe Hitler was a forerunner and a warning about the coming AC, his lack of regard for women as lovers may be an example of the AC's behavior. But it's hard to deny that the worship of the 'queen of heaven' & all associated with "her" was a prevalent desire among many of the Jewish women in the days of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, & Daniel.

 

I think we have to stick to the grammar of the sentence first, then we consider the deeper meaning of it later.
First let's read the Hebrew text first.

ועל-אלהי אבתיו לא יבין ועל-חמדת נשימ ועל-כל-אלוה לא יבין כי על-כל יתגדל

1. Now the questions are these two:

God of his fathers ( Elohei Abotaiv)

Desire of Women ( Hemdat Nashiim)

2. Is God of his fathers or gods of his fathers?

If AC disregard gods of his fathers, why are these gods not included in the next word god ( kol- eloha) ?
If Anti Christ ignore all gods in the next words, then there should be no need to mention gods of his fathers. But specifically the verse mention Elohei of his fathers, and I believe God of his fathers is correct translation.

Also we should note that Elohei Abotaiv is quite common to the God of Abraham and of the fathers of Israel.

God of Abraham ( Elohei Abraham- Gen 26:24) God of my father ( Elohei Abi - Gen 31:5), and many other verses.


If the Anti-christ comes out of Israelites, from Dan tribe as some predict, then he may disregard God of his fathers!

3. Desire of Women or One desired by women?

Hemdat Nashiim ( Deisre of Women) is the form of genitive or adjective relationship between two words.
The typical use of this type expression is also found in Haggai 2:7 in addition to 1 Sam 9:20

Haggai 2:
7 And I will shake all nations, and the desire of all nations shall come: and I will fill this house with glory, saith the LORD of hosts.


The Desire of all nations has come ! and will come again ! The Hope of the nations has come and did a tremendous job at the Cross and will come again!


So, we can find that this word Hemdat is used for more than simple desire or passion, but for a certain object of worship or Hope, or Ruler as it is in 1 Sam 9:20
Hebrew Lexicon B-D-B mentioned this and refers to some object of Idolatry perhaps Adonis=Tammuz. insinuated Astarte, by J. Meinhold.

This may be related to Mary Worship.

But, that is up to the commentators or to the readers.



KJV and NKJV are faithful with the principle of Word-to-Translation, and I don't find any problem with it. The more deeper interpretation should be left to the commentators and readers.

 

According to Daniel, the prince who is to come(Dan. 9:26) will be of Roman descent, as in his time Jerusalem lay in ruins from the Babylonians' attack. The only other destruction of Jerusalem was by the Romans.

There were Romans scattered all along the Mediterranean Coast, & the British Isles, as well as in much of Western Europe. Almost anyone in those lands, and even in the "New World" could be of Roman descent. He could possible be of mixed Roamn-danite heritage. But I tend to believe he will be of direct Roman descent, but not necessarily Italian. That way, "anyone with ears to hear" should be able to ID him.

If of Roman descent, the "gods of his fathers" would be Zeus, etc...the Roman pantheon of gods.

 

Examining 1 Samuel 9:20, we find that Saul was promised all that Israel desires. You turn the phrase a bit when you say it means what you did. In the verse in Samuel, doing that changes the prespective from what Israel thinks is desirable to what the reader thinks is desirable. In Daniel it changes it from what women desire to what man desires in women. IMO it's worth considering but it stretches things a bit. Why can't I format my post??? ugggh Rob

 

1. 1 Sam 9:20 has the same usage for Hemdat, as in Dan 11:37 and Haggai 2:7, IMO.

2. Dan 9:26 is famous for talking about the Messaiah.
Dan 9:26
And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. (KJV)
Sir Robert Anderson calculated this period since the re-construction of Jerusalem until the death of Messiah, Jesus Christ and proven that this prophesy came true.

Jesus Christ was cut off, but not for Himself ( but for us, the sinners).

Many translations other than KJV, NKJV and Third Millenium translated this

Even NIV, NASB, NLT, RSV do not deny that the verse 9:26 is talking about Jesus Christ, the Anointed, the Messiah, but they state that He shall have nothing.

Interestingly NLT translates, " appearing to have accomplished nothing"


The Messiah was cut off after the 69 weeks ( 483 years) since the re-construction of Jerusalem and accomplished a tremendous job at the Cross, as he died not for Himself but for us and sacrificed Himself once for all.