Daniel's vision as recorded in Chapters 10-12 is a most remarkable prophecy. Not written with any symbolism to speak of, it is given in a matter-of-fact format, very cut-and-dry as to its meaning. Which is puzzling considering the wide ranging views on its interpretation. My interpretation is not focused on the Persian Empire and certainly not on the rise and fall of various Ptolemaic and Seleucid kings up to Antiochus IV (whose reign ended around 163 BC), which is probably the most prevailing view. I furthermore would argue against any dual interpretations, which some commentators attempt, which move between different subjects. Usually always, the interpretations shift the time focus from the past to the future too.
This prophecy is not about any such figures but is instead about the Second Coming of Israel's Messiah, or using the appelation more appropriate, the Lion of Judah. As such, there is no past-to-future time shifts except that the scope of the prophecy on the whole does cover much time in relation to the Northern Kingdom, as I will demonstrate. Daniel 10-12 basically address the return of Christ to the earth, how he establishes His kingdom initially in the ancient land of Judah, and how the Northern Kingdom will eventually be brought under His rulership. Why expositors insist on the "Antiochus view" is simply beyond my understanding and I put absolutely zero stock in it. Prophecy, generally speaking, is about the Son, Israel, or both. So why anyone would approach this most crucial of prophecies with the idea that its subject matter is a secular ruler whose actions are really entirely irrelevant today, at least pragmatically, eclipses my ability to explain. Moreover, the close few verses of Daniel 12 explicitly state that the vision applied to the "end of days" that again forces the question of why expositors would look back to ancient secular history for an explanation?
The whole of Daniel 10-12 is written in a nested structure where a part of a verse, a whole verse, or a group of verses is coupled to a corresponding set moving backward from the end, which is easiest explained by the first pairing as shown below:
| Dan | KJV | ELH |
|---|---|---|
| 10: 1a | In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; | In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia, a thing was revealed to Daniel, whose name is called Belteshazzar. |
| b | and the thing was true, but the time appointed was long: | And the matter is true and the appointed time far off. |
| c | and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision. | And he has understood the matter, and has understanding about the appearance. |
| | | | | | | | | |
| 12:13a | But go thou thy way till the end be: | And you, go on to the end. |
| b | for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days. | For you will rest but stand in your lot at the end of the days. |
In this case, 10:1 pairs with 12:13. The leading and trailing portions speak on the same subject matter, mutually amplifying or expounding upon the topic. In the case of this first level, "Level 1," the subject matter is an introduction: 10:1a establishes the time setting in relation to world history and that a vision was revealed to the Father's beloved prophet Daniel; 10:1b states the veracity of the vision, and that it applies to a time far off from Daniel; 10:1c then assures us that Daniel understood the prophetic vision. The complementing portion, 12:13, reinforces that the time is indeed far off, for Daniel will "rest" (die), but stand (resurrected) "at the end of days."
This is the essential feature of this nested structure: that each subsequent pairing matches a portion from the "leading side" to a portion of verse(s) from the "trailing side" and that no verses are skipped on either side and no pairing can cross over each other. Imagine having a "printout" of the three chapters, then folding it roughly in half. Conceptually, the verses then overlap in the same way they pair up, from the top and bottom edge of the printout moving "inward" towards the fold, which is the focus of the entire narrative. This structure is known commonly as a chiasm, but I dislike the term because it means "to cross," which is exactly what the portions can't do. I prefer the more fitting term "nested structure." But no matter what it's called, the structure is present and it is extremely helpful in understanding the prophecy.