Josiah Litch, Uriah Smith, and Daniel 11:40-45

• Christ could have come in the first generation and in the second generation.

• There was a view of Daniel 11 presented for both these histories.

• There was Josiah Litch’s view which he published in An Address to the Public and Especially
the Clergy (1841); and Uriah Smith’s view which he published in Thoughts on Daniel and
Revelation (1882).

• Smith’s view drew largely from that of Litch but adapted it to make accommodation for
the time that had passed between Millerite history and the time in which he was standing.

1863 1888 SC
1841 1882 1989 ‘96

APEC D&R first ToE Mag

published published Published

(Litch) (Smith) (Pippenger)

• The Millerites saw the world ending in 1843 (then 1844). Litch interpreted Daniel 11 in a
manner which saw it end within that time period.

• His view saw Turkey which controlled Syria as the king of the North, Egypt as the king of the
South, and France which is spoken of in verses 30-39.

• His interpretation continues with the literal understanding of KN and KS as being the
powers that control Syria and Egypt respectively.

• Christ originally intended to come in Millerite history. Hence Litch’s interpretation must be
seen as v40-45’s original intent.

• In order to establish the present truth understanding of Dan 11:40-45 another time of the end
has to be created which is not the time of the end referred to in the verse. So our present day
interpretation is an application.

Uriah Smith’s View

• Verses 30-36 mark the taking away of the Daily, the commencement of the persecutions of
the dark ages and the protestant reformation towards the end of the 1260 years.

Daniel 11:30-36 (KJV)

For the ships of Chittim shall come against him: therefore he shall be grieved, and return, and
have indignation against the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return, and have
intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant. 31 And arms shall stand on his part, and
they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they
shall place the abomination that maketh desolate. 32 And such as do wickedly against the
covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong,
and do exploits. 33 And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they

1 of 15
shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days. 34 Now when they
shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help: but many shall cleave to them with flatteries. 35
And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them
white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed. 36 And the king shall
do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and
shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be
accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.

• In Verse 36 he identifies a transition from the papacy to the rising up of a new power -
France.

• The French Revolution happened from 1789-1799.

• Our current interpretation continues with the Papacy as the KN until.

“VERSE 36. And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify
himself above every god, and shall speak marvelous things against the God of gods, and shall
prosper till the indignation be accomplished; for that that is determined shall be done.”
DAR1909 292.1

The king here introduced cannot denote the same power which was last noticed; namely,
the papal power; for the specifications will not hold good if applied to that power.
DAR1909 292.2

Take a declaration in the next verse: “Nor regard any god.” This has never been true of the
papacy. God and Christ, though often placed in a false position, have never been professedly
set aside and rejected from that system of religion. The only difficulty in applying it to a new
power lies in the definite article the; for, it is urged, the expression “the king” would
identify this as one last spoken of. If it could be properly translated a king, there would
be no difficulty; and it is said that some of the best Biblical critics give it this rendering, Mede,
Wintle, Boothroyd, and others translating the passage, “A certain king shall do according to his
will,” thus clearly introducing a new power upon the stage of action. DAR1909 292.3

Three peculiar features must appear in the power which fulfills this prophecy: (1) It must
assume the character here delineated near the commencement of the time of the end, to which
we were brought down in the preceding verse; (2) it must be a wilful power; (3) it must be an
atheistical power; or perhaps the two latter specifications might be united by saying that its
wilfulness would be manifested in the direction of atheism. A revolution exactly answering to
this description did take place in France at the time indicated in the prophecy. Voltaire had
sowed the seeds which bore their legitimate and baleful fruit. That boastful infidel, in his
pompous but impotent self-conceit, had said, “I am weary of hearing people repeat that twelve
men established the Christian religion. I will prove that one man may suffice to overthrow it.”
Associating with himself such men as Rousseau, D’Alembert, Diderot, and other, he undertook
the work. They sowed to the wind, and reaped the whirlwind. Their efforts culminated in the
“reign of terror” of 1793, when the Bible was discarded, and the existence of the Deity denied,
as the voice of the nation. DAR1909 292.4

Verse 37 - France is an atheistic power that would not regard marriage institution.

“VERSE 37. Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard
any god: for he shall magnify himself above all. DAR1909 294.2

The Hebrew word for woman is also translated wife; and Bishop Newton observes that this
passage would be more properly rendered “the desire of wives. This would seem to indicate
that this government, at the same time it declared that God did not exist, would trample

2 of 15
under foot the law which God had given to regulate the marriage institution. And we find
that the historian has, unconsciously perhaps, and if so all the more significantly, coupled
together the atheism and licentiousness of this government in the same order in which they are
presented in the prophecy. He says:- DAR1909 294.3

Verse 38 - France would exalt a false God (Reason).

“VERSE 38. But in his estate shall he honor the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers
knew not shall he honor with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.”
DAR1909 297.2

We meet a seeming contradiction in this verse. How can a nation disregard every god, and yet
honor the god of forces? It could not at one and the same time hold both these positions; but it
might for a time disregard all gods, and then subsequently introduce another worship and
regard the god of forces. Did such a change occur in France at this time? - It did. The attempt
to make France a godless nation produced such anarchy that the rulers feared the power
would pass entirely out of their hands, and therefore perceived that, as a political necessity,
some kind of worship must be introduced; but they did not intend to introduce any movement
which would increase devotion, or develop any true spiritual character among the people, but
only such as would keep themselves in power, and give them control of the national forces. A
few extracts from history will show this. Liberty and country were at first the objects of
adoration. “Liberty, equality, virtue, and morality,” the very opposites of anything they
possessed in fact or exhibited in practice, were words which they set forth as describing the
deity of the nation. In 1793 the worship of the Goddess of Reason was introduced…
DAR1909 297.3

Verse 39 - the revolutionists who adhered to the false religion of the Goddess of reason would
take control of lands and wealth and redistribute them.

“VERSE 39. Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall
acknowledge and increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall
divide the land for gain.” DAR1909 300.5

The system of paganism which had been introduced into France, as exemplified in the
worship of the idol set up in the person of the Goddess of Reason, and regulated by a
heathen ritual which had been enacted by the National Assembly for the use of the
French people, continued in force till the appointment of Napoleon to the provisional
consulate of France in 1799. The adherents of this strange religion occupied the fortified
places, the strongholds of the nation, as expressed in this verse. DAR1909 300.6

But that which serves to identify the application of this prophecy to France, perhaps as clearly
as any other particular, is the statement made in the last clause of the verse; namely, that they
should “divide the land for gain.” Previous to the Revolution, the landed property of France
was owned by a few landlords in immense estates. These estates were required by the
law to remain undivided, so that no heirs or creditors could partition them. But revolution
knows no law; and in the anarchy that now reigned, as noted also in the eleventh of
Revelation, the titles of the nobility were abolished, and their lands disposed of in small
parcels for the benefit of the public exchequer. The government was in need of funds,
and these large landed estates were confiscated, and sold at auction in parcels to suit
purchasers. The historian thus records this unique transaction:- DAR1909 301.1

• Verse 39 continues to 1798 where verse 40 begins.

3 of 15
• Verse 40 returns to the king of the north and the king of the south (Turkey and Egypt) and
France’s engagement with these powers.

Verse 40

Daniel 11:40 (KJV)

And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall
come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and
he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.

• A conflict is seen between the KN, the KS and a “him” who is France contextually.

• This conflict is at the time of the end - 1798.

• Context—France was involved in a power struggle with England. England’s most prized
colonial possession was India which it accessed through Egypt (the gulf of Suez) and the Red
Sea (as opposed to travelling around west and southern Africa and then up east Africa).

•See map. Note the Suez Canal did not exist

at the time of Napoleon’s Egyptian
campaign. But the Gulf of Suez which
emptied into the Red Sea was used by
Britain to access India.

•Napoleon’s Egyptian campaign was for the

purpose of cutting England off from India.

•Napoleon Invaded Egypt in 1798.

•Egypt woud “push” or make a feeble

resistance against France but ultimately
suffer defeat.

•After Egypt’s defeat Turkey would follow

and defeat the French armies.

The downfall of the papacy, which marked the termination of the 1260 years, and according
to verse 35 showed the commencement of the time of the end, occurred on the 10th of
February, 1798, when Rome fell into the hands of Berthier, the general of the French. On
the 5th of March following, Bonaparte received the decree of the Directory relative to the
expedition against Egypt. He left Paris May 3, and set sail from Toulon the 29th, with a large
naval armament consisting of 500 sail, carrying 40,000 soldiers and 10,000 sailors. July 5,
Alexandria was taken, and immediately fortified. On the 23rd the decisive battle of the
pyramids was fought, in which the Mamelukes contested the field with valor and desperation,
but were no match for the disciplined legions of the French. Murad Bey lost all his cannon, 400
camels, and 3,000 men. The loss of the French was comparatively slight. On the 24th,
Bonaparte entered Cairo, the capital of Egypt, and only waited the subsidence of the floods of
the Nile to pursue Murad Bey to Upper Egypt, whither he had retired with his shattered cavalry,

4 of 15
and so make a conquest of the whole country. Thus the king of the south was able to make a
feeble resistance. DAR1909 304.1
At this juncture, however, the situation of Napoleon began to grow precarious. The French
fleet, which was his only channel of communication with France, was destroyed by the
English under Nelson at Aboukir1; and on September 2 of this same year, 1798, the sultan
of Turkey, under feelings of jealousy against France, artfully fostered by the English
ambassadors at Constantinople, and exasperated that Egypt, so long a semi-
dependency of the Ottoman empire, should be transformed into a French province,
declared war against France. Thus the king of the north (Turkey) came against him (France) in
the same year that the king of the south (Egypt) “pushed,” and both “at the time of the end:”
which is another conclusive proof that the year 1798 is the year which begins that period; and
all of which is a demonstration that this application of the prophecy is correct; for so many
events meeting so accurately the specifications of the prophecy could not take place together,
and not constitute a fulfilment of the prophecy. DAR1909 304.2

• After the defeat of Egypt, Turkey declared war against France on September 2nd, 1798.

• A significant event intervening between the defeat of Egypt and the war with Turkey was
the sinking of the French naval fleets by the British on August 1st.

• The fleets transported supplies from France. This severely undermined the French in
the subsequent conflict with Turkey.

• The Turks came against France as a “whirlwind” - with much greater strength of force than
did Egypt.

• After conquering Egypt Napoleon began his march from Cairo to Syria on Feb 27th, 1799. He
conquering El-Arish, then Jaffa (the Joppa of the Bible), then Zeta, then Jafet.

• He then came to St. Jean d’Acre and besieged it on the 18th of March 1799. But the Turks
both within the city and the regiments that had come to the aid of the city defeated Napoleon
and he retreated on the 21st of May 1799.

• Turkey overflowed and passed over - took back the territories that France had taken.

1 The British fleet under the command of Horatio Nelson had been searching in vain for the
French fleet for weeks. The British fleet had not found it in time to prevent the landings in
Egypt, but on 1 August Nelson discovered the French warships anchored in a strong defensive
position in the Bay of Abukir. The French believed that they were open to attack only on one
side, the other side being protected by the shore. During the Battle of the Nile the arriving
British fleet under Horatio Nelson managed to slip half of their ships in between the land and
the French line, thus attacking from both sides. In a few hours 11 out of the 13 French ships of
the line and 2 out of the 4 French frigates were captured or destroyed; the four remaining ships
fled. This frustrated Bonaparte's goal of strengthening the French position in the Mediterranean
Sea, and instead put it totally under British control. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
French_campaign_in_Egypt_and_Syria

5 of 15


6 of 15
 Timeline of Verse 40
Event Date(s)
Fall of the Papacy 10 February 1798

Napoleon leaves Paris for Egypt 3 May 1798

Alexandria conquered 5 July 1798

Battle of the Pyramids 23 July 1798

French fleet destroyed by Britain (Battle of 1-3 August 1798

the Nile)
Campaigns vs defeated Mamelukes August 1798 - March 1799

Turkey declares war on France 2 September 1798

French march from Egypt to Syria 6 February 1799

Siege of El-Arish (French win) 9-19 February 1799

Battle of Mount Tabor (French win) 16 April 1799

Siege of St. Jean D’Acre (French lose) 18 March - 20 May 1799

Verse 41

“VERSE 41. He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown:
but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of
Ammon.” DAR1909 307.1

• Turkey retook Palestine (the glorious land) from France. The many countries are the provinces
of Palestine.

• Edom, Moab, and Ammon lay outside the limits of Palestine and were populated by Arabian
tribes that the Ottomans were never able to conquer. The Ottomans paid them an annual
pension to allow the free passage of trade caravans.

Abandoning a campaign in which one third of the army had fallen victims to war and the
plague, the French retired from St. Jean d’Acre, and after a fatiguing march of twenty-six days
re-entered Cairo in Egypt. They thus abandoned all the conquests they had made in Judea; and
the “glorious land,” Palestine, with all its provinces, here called “countries,” fell back again
under the oppressive rule of the Turk. Edom, Moab, and Ammon, lying outside the limits of
Palestine, south and east of the Dead Sea and the Jordan, were out of the line of march of the
Turks from Syria to Egypt, and so escaped the ravages of that campaign. On this passage,
Adam Clarke has the following note: “These and other Arabians, they [the Turks] have never
been able to subdue. They still occupy the deserts, and receive a yearly pension of forty
thousand crowns of gold from the Ottoman emperors to permit the caravans with the pilgrims
for Mecca to have a free passage.” DAR1909 307.3

7 of 15
Verse 42

“VERSE 42. He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall
not escape.” DAR1909 308.1

• Turmoil in Europe led Napoleon to return. He left General Kleber in charge of Egypt.

• France was once again at war with Austria, Britain, and Russia. Civil war continued to tear
the country apart. The government in Paris was in disarray.

• Kleber was assassinated by a Turk on 14 June, 1800.

• Egypt was taken from France by the Turks and the English in a series of battles.

• Cairo surrendered on June 27, Alexandria on September 2nd, and on Oct 1, 1801 a peace
treaty was signed in London.

On the retreat of the French to Egypt, a Turkish fleet landed 18,000 men at Aboukir. Napoleon
immediately attacked the place, completely routing the Turks, and re-establishing his authority
in Egypt. But at this point, severe reverses to the French arms in Europe called Napoleon home
to look after the interests of his own country. The command of the troops in Egypt was left with
General Kleber, who, after a period of untiring activity for the benefit of the army, was murdered
by a Turk in Cairo, and the command was left with Abdallah Manou. With an army which could
not be recruited, every loss was serious. DAR1909 308.2
Meanwhile, the English government, as the ally of the Turks, had resolved to wrest Egypt from
the French. March 13, 1800, an English fleet disembarked a body of troops at Aboukir. The
French gave battle the next day, but were forced to retire. On the 18th Aboukir surrendered. On
the 28th reinforcements were brought by a Turkish fleet, and the grand vizier approached from
Syria with a large army. The 19th, Rosetta surrendered to the combined forces of the English
and Turks. At Ramanieh a French corps of 4,000 men was defeated by 8,000 English and 6,000
Turks. At Elmenayer 5,000 French were obliged to retreat, May 16, by the vizier, who was
pressing forward to Cairo with 20,000 men. The whole French army was now shut up in Cairo
and Alexandria. Cairo capitulated June 27, and Alexandria, September 2. Four weeks after,
Oct.1, 1801, the preliminaries of peace were signed at London. DAR1909 308.3

Verse 43

“VERSE 43. But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the
precious things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.” DAR1909
309.1

• After taking Egypt the Turks left the Egyptians to manage their own affairs but imposed large
payments of tribute upon them.

• The Libyans and Ethiopians (the “cushim”) were unconquered Arab tribes who sought the
friendship of the Turks. Some of these tribes were tributary to the Turks at that time.

Verse 44

“VERSE 44. But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: therefore he shall
go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many.” DAR1909 309.5

• The Crimean War of 1853-1856.

8 of 15
The Crimean War (1853-1856) stemmed from Russia’s threat to multiple European interests with
its pressure of Turkey. After demanding Russian evacuation of the Danubian Principalities,
British and French forces laid siege to the city of Sevastopol in 1854. The campaign lasted for
a full year, with the Battle of Balaclava and its “Charge of the Light Brigade” among its famous
skirmishes. Facing mounting losses and increased resistance from Austria, Russia agreed
to the terms of the 1856 Treaty of Paris. Remembered in part for Florence Nightingale’s work
for the wounded, the Crimean War reshaped Europe’s power structure.
The Crimean War was a result of Russian pressure on Turkey; this threatened British commercial
and strategic interests in the Middle East and India. France, having provoked the crisis for
prestige purposes, used the war to cement an alliance with Britain and to reassert its military
power. 2

• Turkey declared war against Russia in 1853 and fought with marked tenacity (“with great fury
to destroy…”) for a waning power. They gained important victories before needing the help of
England and France.

Verse 45

“VERSE 45. And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious
holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.” DAR1909 310.2

• The fulfilment of this verse was future to Uriah Smith’s writing.

• It points to a conflict in which Turkey would be forced to retire to its province of Palestine
(which lay between the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean Sea) to establish a temporary
headquarters.

• The powers which had helped it before would not do so on this occasion and this will lead to
its fall.

…Palestine, which contains the “glorious holy mountain,” the mountain on which Jerusalem
stands, “between the seas,” the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean, is a Turkish province; and if
the Turk should be obliged to retire hastily from Europe, he could easily go to any point within
his own dominions to establish his temporary headquarters, here appropriately described as the
tabernacles, movable dwellings, of his palace; but he could not go beyond them. The most
notable point within the limit of Turkey in Asia, is Jerusalem. DAR1909 311.1
And mark, also, how applicable the language to that power: “He shall come to his end, and
none shall help him.” This expression plainly implies that this power has previously received
help. And what are the facts? - In the war against France in 1798-1801, England and Russia
assisted the sultan. In the war between Turkey and Egypt in 1838-1840, England, Russia,
Austria and Prussia intervened in behalf of Turkey. In the Crimean War in 1853-1856, England,
France, and Sardinia supported the Turks. And in the last Russo-Turkish War, the great powers
of Europe interfered to arrest the progress of Russia. And without the help received in all these
instances, Turkey would probably have failed to maintain her position. And it is a notorious fact
that since the fall of the Ottoman supremacy in 1840, the empire has existed only through the
sufferance of the great powers of Europe. Without their pledged support, she would not be long
able to maintain even a nominal existence; and when that is withdrawn, she must come to the
ground. So the prophecy says the king comes to his end and none help him; and he comes to
his end, as we may naturally infer, because none help him, - because the support previously
rendered is withdrawn. DAR1909 311.2

2 https://www.history.com/topics/british-history/crimean-war

9 of 15
• As Smith wrote in the second generation in which Christ could have come around 1888, this
verse could have been fulfilled in the 1888 time period.

Litch and Smith

44 45 J. Litch

40 41 42 43

U. Smith
44 45

• The principle difference between Litch and Smith is in how they understood verses 44 and
45.

• Smith applied verse 44 to Turkey and the Crimean War which ended in 1856. Verse 45
was yet future from when D&R was published in 1882.

• Litch applied verse 44 and 45 to Napoleon, the failure of his Egyptian campaign and his
final defeat at Waterloo (18 June 1815).

• In Litch’s view of verse 44 the “him” that is troubled in Napoleon. The tidings are the news of
the failure of the Syrian campaign (the north), and the failure of his East-India campaign.
These troubled him and he returned to Europe to address difficulties there while leaving his
armies in Egypt.

• “He shall go forth with great fury to destroy…” - his European campaigns following his failure
in Egypt and Syria were very bloody.

• Verse 45 was applied to the battle of Waterloo (18 June 1815) where Napoleon fell with none
to help him.

• He surrendered to the British and was banished to the island of St. Helena where he died
on 5 May, 1821.

Verse 44. “But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him; therefore he shall
go forth with great fury to destroy and utterly to make away many. APEC 101.4

After Buonaparte’s retreat into Egypt, in the course of his negotiations, Sir Sidney Smith
found means of sending a file of newspapers to Buonaparte, giving him an account of
the disastrous state of French affairs on the continent of Europe. Thus tidings out of the
north, from Syria, and the total failure of his East-India expedition, caused a manifest
uneasiness, and induced him to desert his army in a helpless and enfeebled condition,
and make his way, with a single vessel and a few of his intimate friends, back to France.
APEC 101.5
He immediately commenced another Italian campaign, which in two months restored the
Cesalpine Republic to the French dominions. APEC 102.1

10 of 15
And for fifteen years, every successive year brought with it a fresh sacrifice of human
life, to gratify the ambition of the insatiable Buonaparte. During that period, Europe was
deluged with the blood of millions. In his Russian campaign, of an army numbering near
500,000 when he began his march, not 50,000 ever returned to their homes. And in
addition to this, hundreds of thousands of his enemies perished. Thus, truly, did he
“utterly make away many.” APEC 102.2

Verse 45. “And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas, in the glorious
holy mountain;” or, according to the margin, “mountain of delights of holiness.” APEC 102.3

A tabernacle is a temporary abode. “Tabernacles of his palace” would be many temporary

palaces. Such were Napoleon’s. Between the seas with which Europe is surrounded, there was
not a kingdom, with the exception of Turkey, where he was not at one time or other master,
temporarily, of a palace, even to Russia itself. APEC 102.4
Other sovereigns had their established palaces, and with their kingdoms transmitted them to
their posterity, from generation to generation. But this mighty conqueror of the nations,
although he possessed many palaces, yet had none abiding. “Yet he shall come to his end, and
none shall help him.” APEC 103.1
After the battle of Waterloo, Napoleon, the second, time, abdicated the throne of France,
and, finding his escape cut off, he voluntarily surrendered himself into the hands of the
British, by whom he was doomed to exile on the island of St. Helena; where, on the 5th of
May, 1821, amid a dreadful storm of wind and rain, which tore up trees by the roots, and
laid waste almost all which came in its way, Napoleon’s spirit left the scenes of earth, to
appear before him who is the “King of kings and Lord of lords.” Thus he came to his end,
and there was none to help him. And the Bourbon family were restored to the throne of
France. APEC 103.2

• Litch’s view corresponded with an expectation for Christ’s coming in the first generation
(1863) and Smith’s view corresponds with an expectation for Christ coming in the second
generation (1888 time period)

Present Truth Application

• Litch’s view is the original intent of Daniel 11:40.

• It presents only one time of the end with the subsequent verses being fulfilled in proximity
to that ToE.

• A direct reading of the verse does not present a second time of the end as seen in the
present truth application.

• We remove the north and south from their more natural geographic application and
spiritualize them.

• North is referring to Babylon and the papacy is spiritual Babylon at the end of the world.

• South is connected to Egypt and Egypt is associated with atheism.

• Litch and Smith’s view continued with the geographical identification of the KN and KS
which began in Dan 11:5.

• After 1798 the KS disappears and reappears as Russia after the Bolshevik revolution in 1917.

• This prepares the way for the retaliation by the KN 1989.

• The above does not make 1989 a ToE. This is done through repetition and enlargement.

• The line is broken to create a new line which has its own time of the end.

11 of 15
 Verse 40A,
Verse 40B,

ToE,
ToE,

1798 1989

Millerites,
144k,

KN -> KS KS -> KN

Verse 40B,

ToE,

1989

144k,

KS -> KN

A Better Method

• A better way of coming to the movements understanding of Daniel 11:40 is to compare it

with parallel verses in the book of Revelation (Daniel and Revelation are one book).

Revelation 13:3, 10 (KJV)

And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed:
and all the world wondered after the beast. 10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into
captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and
the faith of the saints.

Revelation 17:8, 11 (KJV)

The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go
into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in
the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is
not, and yet is. 11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven,
and goeth into perdition.

• The parallel verses in Rev 13 and 17 bring to view a death of the papacy, its resurrection, and
the world wondering after it.

• Dan 11:40 only shows the fall of the Papacy in 1798 which is called a deadly wound in
Rev 13.

• Rev 17 also teaches that after its resurrection and return to power it will “go into
perdition” - it will be destroyed.

• In Dan 11:41 the deadly wound has healed. The history of verses 41-43 answer to the
world wondering after him. Dan 12:1 answers to his going to perdition.

• Perdition (G684) means “ruin or loss (physical, spiritual or eternal): - damnable (-

nation), destruction, die, perdition, X perish, pernicious ways, waste.” It comes from a
root word (G622) which means “to destroy fully (reflexively to perish, or lose), literally
or figuratively: - destroy, die, lose, mar, perish.”

12 of 15
 • This destruction within the context of Dan 11 comes at the second coming which is
after the close of probation (Dan 12:1).

Death Resurrection Wondered after the beast

Rev 13:3 And I saw one of his heads and his deadly wound and all the world wondered
as it were wounded to was healed after the beast
death
Rev 17:8 The beast that thou sawest and shall ascend out and they that dwell on the
was, and is not of the bottomless pit, earth shall wonder, whose
and go into perdition names were not written in
the book of life from the
*Rev17:8 adds the foundation of the world,
detail that beast goes when they behold the
into perdition following beast that was, and is not,
its resurrection. and yet is.
Compare and Contrast
Dan Daniel 11:40a Dan 11:40b Dan 11:41-43
11:40-45 And at the time of the end
shall the king of the south
push at him…

• By comparing Dan 11:40-45 with the passages in Rev 13 and 17, the resurrection of the
papacy must take place in the history of verse 40.

• This forces us to divide v40 into two parts - the death in 40a and resurrection in 40b; even
though the natural reading of v40 does not suggest this.

Daniel 11 and Revelation 9

• The events of Dan 11:40-45 as presented by Litch were a prelude to August 11, 1840.

• The defeat of France left a power vacuum in Egypt. The Ottoman’s and the remnant of the
Mamluk’s competed for control.

• Sultan _____ sent Muhammad Ali to Egypt as the commander of an Ottoman force tasked
with re-occupying the country in 1801.

• He allied himself with the Egyptian leaders (Umar Makram and Egypt’s Grand Imam of al-
Azhar) and acted to gain the support of the general public.

• In 1805 he replaced Ahmad Khurshid Pasha as the governor of Egypt.

Muhammad Ali's goal was for Egypt to leave the Ottoman Empire and be ruled by his own
hereditary dynasty.[17] To do that, he had to reorganize Egyptian society, streamline the
economy, train a professional bureaucracy, and build a modern military.[18] 3

• Muhammad Ali began to expand his power.

3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Ali_of_Egypt#Rise_to_power

13 of 15
 • Defeated the House of Said and took their territory (1811-12) on behalf of the Turkish
Sultan.

• Conquered Sudan which was a source of territory, gold, and slaves in 1821.

• In their revolution of independence (1822-27), Greece waged war against Turkey. Egypt
was called upon to aid Turkey against Greece. However, Greece won the war due to the
intervention of European powers.

• This was followed by the first Egyptian-Ottoman war (1831-1833)

The First Egyptian–Ottoman War, First Turco-Egyptian War or First Syrian War (1831–
1833) was a military conflict between the Ottoman Empire and Egypt brought about by
Muhammad Ali Pasha's demand to the Sublime Porte for control of Greater Syria, as reward for
aiding the Sultan during the Greek War of Independence. As a result, Muhammad Ali's forces
temporarily gained control of Syria, advancing as far north as Kütahya.4

• Russia intervened on behalf of Turkey. France and Britain intervened to force a peace treaty
which saw Egypt retaining Syria but remaining a vassal of Turkey.

Though no military forces remained between Ibrahim's army and Istanbul [after the Battle of
Konya - 21 November 1832], severe winter weather forced him to make camp at Konya long
enough for the Sublime Porte to conclude an alliance with Russia, and for Russian forces to
arrive in Anatolia, blocking his route to the capital.[4] The arrival of a European power would
prove to be too great a challenge for Ibrahim's army to overcome. Wary of Moscow's
expanding influence in the Ottoman Empire and its potential to upset the balance of
power, French and British pressure forced Muhammad Ali and Ibrahim to agree to the
Convention of Kütahya. Under the settlement, the Syrian provinces were ceded to Egypt,
and Ibrahim Pasha was made the governor-general of the region.[3]
The treaty left Muhammad Ali a nominal vassal of the Sultan. Six years later, when
Muhammad Ali moved to declare de jure independence, the Sultan declared him a traitor
and sent an army to confront Ibrahim Pasha, launching the Second Egyptian–Ottoman
War.[1] 5

The Second Egyptian–Ottoman War or Second Turko–Egyptian War lasted from 1839 until
1841 and was fought mainly in Syria, whence it is sometimes referred as the (Second) Syrian
War.
In 1839, the Ottoman Empire moved to reoccupy lands lost to Muhammad Ali in the First
Turko-Egyptian War. The Ottoman Empire invaded Syria, but after suffering a defeat at
the Battle of Nezib appeared on the verge of collapse. On 1 July, the Ottoman fleet sailed
to Alexandria and surrendered to Muhammad Ali. Britain, Austria and other European
nations, rushed to intervene and force Egypt into accepting a peace treaty. From
September to November 1840, a combined naval fleet, made up of British and Austrian vessels,
cut off Ibrahim's sea communications with Egypt, followed by the occupation of Beirut and
Acre by the British. On 27 November 1840, the Convention of Alexandria took place. British
Admiral Charles Napier reached an agreement with the Egyptian government, where the latter
abandoned its claims to Syria and returned the Ottoman fleet. 6

4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian–Ottoman_War_(1831–1833)
5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian–Ottoman_War_(1831–1833)
6 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian–Ottoman_War_(1839–1841)#Aftermath

14 of 15
• The king of the north and the king of the south in his application of Dan 11:40-45 were the
powers seen in his application of Rev 9 in 1840 - Egypt and the Ottoman Empire (Second
Woe).

• Napoleon and France were defeated at Waterloo. England, Russia, and Prussia were the
powers seen in 1840 that interfered to restrain the Ottoman Empire.

• Islam is seen in the history of Litch’s application as it is seen in that of Smith. Therefore it can
be seen in the history of the present truth application even if it is not brought out expressly in
the verses.

• The third woe as Islam is not described in Rev 9 neither is it described in Dan 11:40-45.
But it can be seen in both through the principle of the triple application.

• To reject Uriah Smith’s version of Daniel 11:40 is to reject Josiah Litch’s version. And to reject
Josiah Litch’s version is dangerous because Josiah Litch’s understanding of v40 is part of the
background history of his interpretation of the Rev 9 and August 11, 1840.

15 of 15