Chapter 3
and its Appendix belabored this
Answers in
the question
The key to understanding Dan 8:14 is
to first understand the question that
induced it. To understand the
question however we must first
understand the origin and work of the
little horn. Identity of the little horn
is the key to understanding Dan 8:14.
Match the little horn to Antiochus
Epiphanes, and you will literalise the
time period, sanctuary and cleansing
of Dan 8:14. Match the little horn to
apostate medieval religion, and the
time period, sanctuary and cleansing
cannot be literal. This is why Ch 1
TABLE 1
NOUN
four horns
four winds
four winds of heaven
out of one
out of one of them
The gender rule reveals only one
correct option: “Out of one of them”
(masculine) can only refer to
“heaven” which is also masculine.
“Out of one (feminine) of them” can
only refer to “winds” which is also
feminine. The text literally reads:
“Out of one [of the winds] of
them [the heavens] came a
horn”.
41
point.
Origin
The last part of Dan 8: 8 reads:
“…the great horn was broken and for
it came up four notable ones toward
the four winds of heaven”. Verse 9
reads: “And out of one them came
forth a little horn..”. Some therefore
conclude that the little horn arose out
of one of the fragments of the
Grecian empire but that would fail to
align with the chronology of empires
in Daniel 7. (See Ch 1 pp 20-21 and
Appendix to Ch 1 pp ii and xiv-xiv).
Furthermore, nouns and pronouns in
Hebrew have either masculine or
feminine gender. A pronoun
referring to a noun must be feminine
if the noun is feminine. The genders
of all the nouns in the verses are
listed in Table 11:
GENDER
feminine
feminine
masculine plural
feminine
masculine
The little horn did not come out of
Grecian empire but from one of the
points of the “four winds of heaven”.
This is consistent with the little horn
of Daniel 7 which arose out of the
empire that succeeded Grecia. In
both Dan 7 and 8 the little horn is an
entirely new power.
Political and religious work
The little horn’s work is described in
verses 9 and 10. Daniel uses the
41
Chapter 3
Hebrew verb gadal which means “to
grow up”, “to be great”. In verses 4
and 8 he used the identical verb gadal
to describe the work of Medo-Persia
and Grecia. These empires exercised
military power. The little horn would
exercise military power towards the
south, east and the land of Israel in its
first phase.
In verse 10 a second phase of growth
is depicted using the verb gadal
again. This time the growth is toward
the heavenly host which the previous
empires had not engaged. The
language employed in this second
phase is similar to Isaiah 14:12-14
which depicts Lucifer’s aspirations.
The work and nature of the little horn
is described in both military language
and imagery associated with the
sanctuary services (verses 10-12).
Like Lucifer, the little horn extends
its political and religious control to
the heavens, the dwelling place of
God. You will recall that the earthly
sanctuary was established so that God
might “dwell among them” (Ex 25:8).
However as a heavenly setting is
depicted in verses 10-14 and the
words “sanctuary” and “the daily” are
employed three times, it hints to the
heavenly sanctuary of Hebrews 8:1-2.
This conviction strengthens as we
proceed.
Of 20 commentaries consulted all
(except one) take the view that the
location of the judgment scene here
depicted is in heaven. Psalm 11:4
says “The Lord’s throne is in His
holy temple, the Lord’s throne is in
heaven”. In Dan 4:17 a heavenly
council also pronounced judgment, so
42
the lesson is “heaven rules” (verse
26, 37. Compare Dan 2: 28).
Dr Ford’s criticism is that this
interpretation unreasonably links Dan
8:14 to Leviticus 16 so the reader
should remain alert as we proceed.
At war with God
The heavenly “host” of verse 10
refers to heavenly armies as the
identical word “host” is used in Deut
20:9; 1 Kings 2:5; Psalm 44:9; 60:10
where it means “troops” or “army”.
The identical word “host” is used in
Numbers 4:3, 23, 30 to describe the
earthly sanctuary’s Levitical guard.
The “host of heaven” is used in
1 Kings 22:19 and Psalm 103:19-21
to describe the angels of God. The
Prince of the heavenly host that
Daniel refers to in verse 11 is the
Leader of the host described in
Joshua 5:13-15. This heavenly being
is in charge of God’s heavenly armies
on earth. In Psalm 103:21 the
heavenly host is described as the
Lord’s ministers or servants.
From the foregoing it is increasingly
clear that the little horn is at war
against God. Note the little horn
becomes great against the Prince of
the host. Daniel refers to Messiah the
Prince (9:25) and Michael the prince
(10:13, 21; 12:1). Dan 8:11 says the
Prince is in charge of the “daily” or
the “continual” (tamid) so this Person
has priestly and kingly functions.
The term tamid is only ever used in
the Old Testament to refer to the
daily tasks connected to the sanctuary
services and which were performed
continually: keeping the lamps
burning (Ex 27:20), burning incense
42
Chapter 3
continually (Ex 30:8), keeping the
fire on the altar burning continually
(Lev 6:13) and ensuring that a burnt
offering was continually burning on
the altar (Ex 29:42). The conviction
the heavenly sanctuary is in view is
stronger.
Taking away the daily
Please observe that the word tamid or
“continual” is not only a direct
reference to the sanctuary but a
specific reference to the daily work of
the priests in the Holy place
throughout the year. In the Old
Testament the word tamid is never
associated with the work of the high
priest in the Most Holy place on the
Day of Atonement.
Hebrews 8:1-2 describes a High
Priest who officiates in “a sanctuary
set up by the Lord and not man” who
“always lives to intercede” for us
(7:25). Christ’s incarnation,
sacrificial death, resurrection and
ascension qualified Him to serve as
High Priest in the heavenly temple.
(Heb 4:14 to 5:10; 9:11-12). What is
under attack by the actions of the
little horn is God’s redemptive plan
as embodied in the Gospel. This
explains the confusion, opposition
and continuing ignorance to which
the sanctuary doctrine is subjected,
being entirely consistent with Satan’s
aspirations as manifested in the work
of the little horn.
It is helpful that the Hebrew verb for
“to take” is rum. In the sanctuary
services the word rum is used to
describe the action in removing the
portion of a sacrificial victim that
goes to the altar (Lev 4:8,10). When
43
rum is used with “from” it means
separation (Ex 29:27; Lev 4:10;
1 Sam 2:8; Ps 113:7; Isa 57:14).
Sometimes it results in exaltation
(1 Kings 14:7; Ps 113:7, 8). In the
context of Dan 8:11 rum means “be
removed” with the view to separation
and because of the word “magnified”
in verse 11 it can also mean removing
with the purpose of being “exalted”
In removing the daily or the
“continual” (tamid) the little horn
usurps the work of the Prince in the
heavenly sanctuary making His
mediation ineffective for those who
support its religious and political
aspirations. It considers the act one
of self-exaltation and should be
compared to Lucifer’s aspirations in
Isaiah 14:12-14.
Casts place of sanctuary down
Please observe that the little horn
“casts” the place of the sanctuary.
The Hebrew for “cast” or “throw” is
shalak which is also used in verse 7
to describe the attack of the he-goat
over the ram. The word expresses
rejection or abandonment such as
when fleeing soldiers “throw” their
equipment (2 Kings 7:15), a tree
throws its blossoms (Job 15:33) and
the Israelites did not throw (abandon)
their idols (Eze 20:8). The Psalmist
prays “Do not cast me ..when I am
old” (Ps 71:9). The act of throwing
or casting the place of the sanctuary
is an act of rejecting, forsaking and
abandoning. It is not an act of
contamination and not a single term
is used to indicate this. The word
shalak is also used in Ex 32:19; 2
Kings 23:12; Eze 5:4; Amos 8:3 to
designate the act of destroying or
43
Chapter 3 44

ruining. The little horn also destroys
and ruins the place of the sanctuary
where the Prince was officiating.
The emphasis is on the place of the
sanctuary. Dan 8:11 is the only use
in the Old Testament of the phrase
“place of his sanctuary”. The
Hebrew word translated “place” is
used in 1 Kings 8:39, 43 to describe
God’s heavenly dwelling place, the
heavenly sanctuary. In verse 13 it
refers to Gods’ earthly dwelling
place, the earthly sanctuary.
Compare Ex 25:8. The Hebrew
translated “place” can also refer to a
literal (Ezra 3:3) or a metaphorical
foundation (Ps 89:14; 97:2). The
“place of His sanctuary” in Dan
8:11 therefore refers to the very
essence and purpose of the
sanctuary in the same sense that
“justice and judgment” are the
foundation of God’s throne (Ps
89:14).
There is a strong connection between:
(i) taking away of the continual,
throwing away the place of the
sanctuary and (ii) separating away the
continual sacrifice with the rejection,
abandonment and ruination of the
essence of the heavenly sanctuary’s
ministration. The Messianic
Prince’s continual work of
mediation, intercession and
forgiveness of sins is the essence of
the heavenly sanctuary. It is this
work which the little horn
mis-appropriates and it is its
foundation as the centre of
mediation and forgiveness that the
little horn rejects.
That the heavenly sanctuary is in
view here should now be obvious.
It is very apparent there is a
theological, linguistic and ideological
connection between Dan 8:14 and
Leviticus. Sanctuary language is
employed in Dan 8:13-14 and clean
sacrificial sanctuary animals are used
as symbols in Dan 8: 20-21 unlike the
unclean animals depicted in Dan 7.
The words ‘daily’ and ‘sanctuary’
appear three times in verses 10-11.
Hebrew readers in Daniel’s day
would have been well acquainted
with the sanctuary terminology used,
but we today must go to Leviticus to
interpret their meaning. Consider the
sanctuary allusions summarized in
Table 2:

TABLE 2
DANIEL REFERENCE SANCTUARY REFERENCE
“horn” Horns of altar of sweet incense (Lev 4:7)
“transgression” Transgressions expiated on Day of Atonement (Lev 16:16)
“sanctuary” Tent of Meeting or Tabernacle (Lev 16:6, 16, 17, 20, 23, 33)
“hosts” Levitical guard (Num 4:3, 23
“take away” Remove part of sacrifice that belongs to God (Lev 4:10)
“holy ones” Sanctuary terminology
“daily” Daily sacrifices in the Holy Place of sanctuary
“Prince of hosts” A heavenly being (Josh 5:13-15) performing the ‘daily’
“ram”, “goat” Sanctuary animals

44
Chapter 3
Verse 12
The first part of verse 12 can be
puzzling. The KJV says: “And an
host was given him against the daily
by reason of transgression..”.
The literal Hebrew is difficult.
A plausible translation is “An army
will be set over the daily … in an act
of rebellion”. The verb “to give”
(nathan) when used with the
preposition “over” (cal) means very
often “to appoint someone over”.
The most readable way to explain the
verse is to say that once the little horn
misappropriated the continual it
immediately appointed a host or army
over it to control it and administer it.
The phrase “by reason of
transgression” is not due to the
rebellion of God’s people because the
entire book of Daniel nowhere
considers persecution of God’s
people as punishment for their sins.
It presents the opposite theme:
fidelity and loyalty to God arouses
persecution. The offending conduct
is therefore on the part of the little
horn driven by a spirit of rebellion
against God. The Hebrew word for
“rebellion” pesha’ is the strongest
Old Testament term for sin because it
means more than rebellion against
God. It includes the notion of
breaking with Him, taking away what
is His, robbing Him, defrauding Him,
laying hands on what belongs to God.
This precisely describes the activity
of the little horn.
Casts truth to ground
The little horn casts truth to the
ground. The context supports the
45
notion that it is truth about the daily
and the sanctuary which is cast.
The little horn does more than
despise, reject and disregard truth.
It casts to the ground the truth about
God’s redemptive plan. It strikes at
the heart of the gospel. These forces
are at work even today. The gospel
of Christ’s mediation is inherent in
the sanctuary truth and this explains
why it has always been the focus of
Satan’s best efforts. When
sanctuary truth is under attack it is
the gospel that is under attack.
There is no difference between the
two.
More clues in the question
Verse 13 provides more details about
the pesha’ or “rebellion” on the part
of the little horn. The question
repeats the fact that the little horn
brings desolation and tramples the
host and sanctuary. The little horn
desolated the sanctuary by usurping
the Prince’s priestly work, rejecting
the place of the sanctuary and by
establishing its own priestly work.
To those who succumb to its power it
makes inaccessible the true sanctuary
where God dwells. The heavenly
sanctuary becomes desolate under the
new system introduced by the little
horn. The notion of trampling in Eze
34:18, 19 and Isaiah 5:5 is associated
with treating “useless” and
“ineffective” that which is trampled.
This is precisely how the little horn
regards the heavenly sanctuary. It
explains why the sanctuary truth
meets with such fierce opposition,
has been the hot-bed of doctrinal
controversy and continues to be little
45
Chapter 3
understood by believers and the
Protestant community at large.
A solid understanding about the work
of the little horn helps to understand
the question which prompted the
answer of Dan 8:14. But that does
not mean that the question of verse
13 is solely about the little horn to
which verse 14 is the answer.
The Question
Dan 8:13 provides the all important
question to the all important answer
provided in verse 14.
The grammatical construction of
“How long...” emphasises the end of
the time period and can also read as
“Until when..?” That this is the case
is obvious from the answer: “Until
2300 days, then...”. The question
literally reads:
“Until when the vision (chazon),
the daily (tamid) and the rebellion
(pesha’) that causes desolation to
give both the sanctuary and the
host a trampling?’
The original Hebrew does not include
the word “concerning” the daily. The
one question is therefore concerned
with:
• when the entire vision
(chazon) of Dan 8 would be
fulfilled.
• when the work of the
Messianic Prince (tamid) in
the holy place will conclude.
In preparing this chapter, I am indebted to the work of A.M Rodriguez “The Sanctuary
and Its Cleansing” (1994 Adventist Review Supplement).
46
• when the rebellion (pesha’) of
the little horn in attacking the
sanctuary will end.
In short the question is “How long
before the whole vision is fulfilled
and the daily in the sanctuary and
the rebellion against the sanctuary
comes to an end?” I also have a
“how long” question: How long will
weird and wonderful interpretations
arise out of Daniel 8:14? Answer:
Until when readers grasp that the
question of verse 13 does not limit
itself to the work of the little horn but
embraces the entire vision of chapter
8 and the work of daily ministration
in the heavenly sanctuary. Grasp
this and it becomes obvious that the
little horn is an infinitely larger threat
to the gospel of sanctuary truth than
that posed by Antiochus Epiphanes.
The Year-day principle must apply
because the time expanse in view is
too vast to be 2300 literal days,
extending from the time of Medo-
Persia to an event just prior to the
second advent - the cleansing of the
heavenly sanctuary.
Let it not be lost on us that we
replicate the work of the little horn
each time we attempt to do through
works that which Christ our mediator
has already done and which is ours
now by faith. Let your gaze go past
the beasts and horns and behold the
gospel of righteousness by faith in the
sanctuary above. It is that which is
under threat in Daniel 8.
46