This video presents a thorough scholarly rebuttal to the claim that Daniel 8:23’s phrase “in the latter time of their kingdom” (beʾaḥarīt malkhūtām) disqualifies Antiochus IV Epiphanes as the “little horn” because he allegedly appeared too early in Seleucid history rather than at the very end of all Greek divisions.

Key Arguments Presented:

Linguistic Foundation: The Hebrew term ʾaḥarīt (ַא ֲחִר ית) means “after-part” or “latter portion,” denoting culmination rather than termination. The phrase naturally renders as “during the later phase of their rule,” not necessarily “at the very end” of all Hellenistic domains.

Internal Biblical Usage: The video demonstrates Daniel’s flexible use of ʾaḥarīt throughout the book, showing it consistently refers to later phases within epochs rather than history’s final cessation. Examples include Daniel 2:28-29 (future relative to Nebuchadnezzar) and 10:14 (events from Persia through Greece to Antiochus).

Historical Context Analysis: By the 170s BCE, two of Alexander’s four successor kingdoms (Macedon and Asia Minor) were already declining under Roman pressure. Antiochus IV ruled when Greek successors were past their zenith, making his reign genuinely “latter time” within Hellenistic history.

Literary Coherence: The video emphasizes that Daniel 8:22-23 presents a natural narrative sequence where the “fierce king” emerges from among the four Greek divisions, specifically fitting the Seleucid context rather than requiring an entirely new empire like Rome.

Theological Timing: The accompanying phrase “when the transgressors have reached their full measure” (kehatām hapōšəʿîm) functions as a moral-theological clock indicating ripeness for divine intervention. Jewish apostasy under Hellenizing priests Jason and Menelaus perfectly fulfilled this condition during Antiochus’s era.

Early Jewish Reception: Contemporary sources like 1 Maccabees 1:10-11 and 2 Maccabees 7:17-19 explicitly recognize Antiochus’s generation as Daniel’s “latter time,” with 1 Maccabees directly echoing Daniel’s syntax about a figure arising “out of them”.

Philological Precision: The video notes that the Hebrew phrase lacks definite articles, the term qēṣ (“termination”), or eschatological markers found elsewhere in Daniel, supporting a phase-based rather than terminal interpretation.

Conclusion: The phrase represents standard apocalyptic idiom for climactic moments within history—specifically the morally and politically exhausted twilight of Hellenistic dominion. Antiochus IV’s reign (175-164 BCE) perfectly fulfills every linguistic, contextual, and historical requirement of being in “the latter time of their kingdom”.