Daniel 11:37 · Bible study
Daniel 11:37 Commentary: Who Is This King? The Meaning of 'Desire of Women'
Hebrew · 10 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Examine Daniel 11:37's identity, Antiochus or antichrist, and the debated phrase 'desire of women' in biblical prophecy.
Research Summary
- Meaning: A self-exalting ruler rejects ancestral faith, natural bonds, and all deities, setting himself as supreme.
- Key words: 'gods of his fathers' (ancestral religion), 'desire of women' (Tammuz/Adonis, marriage, or messianic hope), 'magnify himself' (Hithpael of gadal, active self-aggrandizement).
- Main debate: Whether the figure is Antiochus IV Epiphanes, a future antichrist, or both in a double reference.
- Theological theme: Pride as the core of rebellion, the creature displacing the Creator (echoing Isaiah 14:13, 14).
- Best use: A sobering allegory of unchecked human arrogance; a warning to examine allegiances and the posture of the heart toward God.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
He will show no regard for the gods of his fathers, nor for the one desired by women, nor for any other god, because he will magnify himself above them all.
WEB World English Bible 2000
He won’t regard the gods of his fathers, or the desire of women, or regard any god; for he will magnify himself above all.
KJV King James Version 1769
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.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
Neither shall he regard the gods of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god; for he shall magnify himself above all.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
And unto the God of his fathers he doth not attend, nor to the desire of women, yea, to any god he doth not attend, for against all he magnifieth himself.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
And he will not regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women; nor regard anygod: for he will magnify himself above all.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
And he shall make no account of the God of his fathers: and he shall follow the lust of women, and he shall not regard any gods: for he shall rise up against all things.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Y del Dios de sus padres no se cuidará, ni del amor de las mujeres: ni se cuidará de dios alguno, porque sobre todo se engrandecerá.
Ele não respeitará os deuses de seus pais, nem para o preferido das mulheres; nem respeitará deus algum, pois se engrandecerá sobre todos.
Il n’aura égard ni aux dieux de ses pères, ni à la divinité qui fait les délices des femmes; il n’aura égard à aucun dieu, car il se glorifiera au-dessus de tous.
Und die Götter seiner Väter wird er nicht achten; er wird weder Frauenliebe noch irgend eines Gottes achten; denn er wird sich wider alles aufwerfen.
En op de goden zijner vaderen zal hij geen acht geven, noch op de begeerte der vrouwen; hij zal ook op geen God acht geven, maar hij zal zich boven alles groot maken.
Egli non avrà riguardo agli dèi de’ suoi padri; non avrà riguardo né alla divinità favorita delle donne, né ad alcun dio, perché si magnificherà al disopra di tutti.
Ani na bogów ojców swych nie będzie dbał, ani o miłość niewiast, ani o żadnego boga dbać będzie, przeto, że się nade wszystko wyniesie.
И о богах отцов своих он не помыслит, и ни желания жен, ни даже божества никакого не уважит; ибо возвеличит себя выше всех.
他必不 顧 他列祖 的神，也不 顧 婦女 所羨慕的神， 無論何 神 他都不顧；因為 他必自大，高過 一切。
He will have no respect for the gods of his fathers or for the god desired by women; he will have no respect for any god: for he will put himself on high over all.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Daniel 11:37
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree that the king described in Daniel 11:37 is a self-exalting ruler who rejects ancestral religion, disregards the 'desire of women,' and sets himself above every deity. Beyond that, sharp divisions remain. Barnes applies the verse to Antiochus IV Epiphanes, noting his contempt for the gods of his fathers and his imposition of Greek cults. But Calvin objects that Antiochus did not actually neglect all gods or the god of his fathers, so he sees the verse pointing to the Papacy or Muhammad (similar to Clarke and Gill, who read it as the Roman antichrist). The Cambridge Bible draws the connection to Antiochus, interpreting 'desire of women' as Tammuz/Adonis. Keil and Delitzsch insist Antiochus does not fit historically, since he honored his own gods. The verse’s triple denial, 'gods of his fathers,' 'desire of women,' 'any god', is universally read as a complete rupture from all forms of religious and natural affection, climaxing in the claim 'he will magnify himself above all.'
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: High
Main views:
- Historical Antiochus: Supported by Barnes, Cambridge, and many critical scholars; the prophecy fits Antiochus IV's Hellenization campaign, temple desecration, and alleged rejection of Seleucid gods (1 Maccabees 1:41–50).
- Future antichrist (typological): Defended by Gill, Clarke, and others; the language of self-exaltation and the rejection of marriage align with the man of lawlessness (2 Thessalonians 2:4) and the apostasy of 1 Timothy 4:1–3.
- Double reference (both/and): Calvin and JFB see Antiochus as a type pointing to a greater antichrist; the prophecy operates on two horizons, with the immediate fulfillment in Antiochus and the ultimate in a final opponent of Christ.
What is clear: The ruler is defined by absolute self-exaltation, rejecting all inherited faith, natural human affection, and every claim of deity—a portrait of pride that Scripture consistently warns against.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Identity of the king | All agree the figure is a tyrannical ruler who exalts himself above all deities. | Some identify him with Antiochus IV Epiphanes (Barnes, Cambridge), others with a future antichrist (Gill, Clarke), and still others see a double reference (Calvin, JFB). |
| Meaning of 'the desire of women' | The phrase refers to something deeply valued, especially by women, that the king rejects. | Possibilities include: Tammuz/Adonis worship (Cambridge, Ewald), the goddess Anaïtis/Mylitta (Gesenius, Michaelis), marriage and natural affection (Clarke, Calvin on Pope), or the Jewish longing for the Messiah (JFB, Newton). |
| Rejection of the gods of his fathers | The king breaks with the religion of his ancestors, indicating spiritual rootlessness. | For Antiochus, this fits his promotion of Zeus over Seleucid gods (Barnes), but critics note he still honored his native gods (Calvin, Keil). For antichrist readings, it signifies departure from the apostolic faith. |
| Is the prophecy exclusively fulfilled? | The text describes real events that God ordains and allows. | Historicists see Antiochus as the direct referent; futurists see a final antichrist; idealists read it as a pattern of rebellion recurring in every age. |
Historical & Cultural Context
Daniel 11 offers a detailed prophecy of conflict between the 'king of the north' (the Seleucid Empire) and the 'king of the south' (the Ptolemaic dynasty). By verse 36, the focus narrows to a single arrogant ruler. For over a century, many scholars identified this figure as Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175, 164 BC), who deeply persecuted the Jews and desecrated the temple.
Antiochus was brought up in Rome, not his homeland, which may explain his disregard for the ancestral gods of the Seleucids. Instead, he promoted Zeus Olympios, building a statue of that god in the Jerusalem temple (1 Maccabees 1:54). His coins carried the head of Zeus or Apollo. This fits the rejection of 'the gods of his fathers.'
The phrase 'the desire of women' hits a cultural nerve. In Canaanite and Syrian religion, Tammuz (Adonis) was a youthful deity whose death and resurrection were mourned and celebrated, especially by women (Ezekiel 8:14). Worship of the 'desired one' was deeply emotional and embodied the longing for fertility and life. To spurn that cult, or to plunder its temple in Elymais, as Antiochus reportedly did (1 Maccabees 6:1, 4), would be a direct assault on the tenderest affections of his subjects. Others see the phrase as denoting marriage itself (the desire for a wife, as in Deuteronomy 21:11) or the Jewish longing for the Messiah through childbirth. The king’s total self-exaltation echoes Isaiah 14:13, 14, a pattern of pride that Scripture consistently identifies as the heart of rebellion against God.
Textual Notes
The supplied sources note no significant textual variants for Daniel 11:37. The verse is stable across the Hebrew manuscripts and early versions (LXX, Peshitta, Vulgate). The reading is uncontested for all major traditions.
Reception History
Early interpreters like Jerome understood the chapter as a literal prophecy of Antiochus Epiphanes (Commentary on Daniel). During the Reformation, many Protestant commentators applied the language to the papacy, Calvin saw both Antiochus and the Pope as types, while Clarke and Gill explicitly identified the king with the Roman antichrist, reading 'the desire of women' as the enforced celibacy of priests (1 Timothy 4:3). In the nineteenth century, historicist interpreters continued to defend the Antiochus reference, but with growing attention to the typological antichrist. Jewish reception long resisted christological readings and focused on the historical Seleucid persecution. Modern critical scholarship generally returns to the Antiochus identification, while evangelical futurism reserves the ultimate fulfillment for a beast-like figure of the last days. The phrase 'desire of women' has sustained diverse readings across traditions, all sensitive to the verse’s note of cold, transgressive pride.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- Rejection of inheritance. The king ignores 'the gods of his fathers', the faith, traditions, and restraints passed down by his ancestors. He is a man untethered from the past, inventing a religion of his own convenience.
- Rejection of natural affection. Whatever 'the desire of women' means, marriage, motherly hope, or the cult of Tammuz, it points to the deepest human bonds and longings. This king spurns them all, showing a heart grown cold to the very things that make life human.
- Rejection of any god. He magnifies himself above all, not just above other deities but above every claim on his allegiance. This is the final stage of pride: the creature shrinks until he is the only object left in his universe.
Five-point outline
- Ancestral faith disowned. He will not regard the God of his fathers, a break with the worship that shaped his people.
- Natural bonds broken. 'Desire of women', whether a goddess, a wife, or the hope of a child, is nothing to him.
- Every deity dismissed. He regards 'any god' as irrelevant.
- Self above all. He 'magnifies himself above all', the ultimate distortion of creation.
- The end that awaits. Though he prospers for a time, the prophecy’s context (v.40, 45) promises his downfall. Pride does not last.
Illustration hooks
- A child raised in a religious home who later abandons every belief of their parents, not for a reasoned faith but for self-rule.
- A leader who sacrifices family relationships for career advancement, eventually seeing no one as worthy of their loyalty.
- The slow drift of a person who starts by ignoring inherited values and ends by declaring themselves the only authority that matters.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Is this king a historical person like Antiochus, or a future antichrist figure? Can it be both?
- What does 'desire of women' mean, and why would rejecting it be a sign of evil?
- How do I recognize seeds of self-exaltation in my own heart before they grow into full rebellion?
Leading a Discussion
This verse confronts us with a portrait of absolute self-exaltation. But it also raises hard questions: How far is our culture already drifting from inherited faith and natural affection? Where are we tempted to make ourselves the final authority? Use these questions to explore the text together.
Discussion questions
- Read Daniel 11:36, 39. What patterns of pride do you see in this king? How are they similar to or different from pride you observe today?
- The verse says he won’t regard 'the gods of his fathers.' Why is rejecting the faith of one’s upbringing a significant marker of arrogance? What does it show about the king’s heart?
- ‘The desire of women’ is interpreted in several ways: as Tammuz worship, as marriage, or as the longing for the Messiah. Which of these makes the most sense to you from the context? What difference does the interpretation make?
- In what ways does our own culture encourage us to 'magnify ourselves above all'? How does this show up in daily life?
- The king also rejects 'any god.' How does a person’s view of God relate to their view of themselves? Can a person claim to respect God while still putting themselves first?
- How does the New Testament use similar language about a man of lawlessness (2 Thessalonians 2:4)? What does that connection teach us about the nature of evil?
- If self-exaltation is the root of this king’s sin, what is the opposite virtue? How can we cultivate humility in a world that prizes self-promotion?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Genesis 3:5 | for God knows that in the day you eat it, your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” |
| Genesis 3:16 | To the woman he said, “I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth. You will bear children in pain. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” |
| Deuteronomy 5:21 | “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife. Neither shall you desire your neighbor’s house, his field, or his male servant, or his female servant, his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor’s.” |
| Deuteronomy 21:11 | and see among the captives a beautiful woman, and you are attracted to her, and desire to take her as your wife, |
| Song of Solomon 7:10 | I am my beloved’s. His desire is toward me. |
| Isaiah 14:13 | You said in your heart, “I will ascend into heaven! I will exalt my throne above the stars of God! I will sit on the mountain of assembly, in the far north! |
| Ezekiel 24:16 | “Son of man, behold, I will take away from you the desire of your eyes with one stroke; yet you shall neither mourn nor weep, neither shall your tears run down. |
| II Thessalonians 2:4 | He opposes and exalts himself against all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, setting himself up as God. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
10 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke identifies the "God of his fathers" as the God of the apostles and evangelists, which the church replaced with councils and traditions. He reads "the desire of women" as the church's anti-marriage laws, and "nor regard any god" as the church setting its own decrees above Scripture.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes sees the king as utterly unrestrained by both hereditary religion and the softening influences of women, such as their kindness, compassion, and tears. He argues that disregarding what virtuous women hold dear is the same spirit as despising God, and that the two always go together in a tyrant.
Calvin's Commentaries Reformed 1564
Calvin rejects identifying this king with Antiochus, the Pope, or Mohammed. He argues that each fails to match the prophecy fully, especially the detail about disregarding the love of women. For Calvin, these partial fits prove the prophecy points to a future figure not yet identified.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The Cambridge Bible commentary argues against the older view that Daniel 11:36 shifts from Antiochus Epiphanes to a future Antichrist. It insists the passage is a continuous description of the same king, citing Antiochus's neglect of ancestral gods, his devotion to Zeus, and the "desire of women" as a reference to the god Tammuz.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva note highlights that this figure rejects both the true God and every other deity, even setting aside natural human affections. His defining trait is self-exaltation: he magnifies himself above all, recognizing no authority higher than his own will.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill identifies the Antichrist with the papacy. "The God of his fathers" refers to Christ, whom papal authority claims to represent yet actually opposes in his offices. "The desire of women" forbids lawful marriage for priests, a practice he calls notoriously lustful. The Antichrist rejects all divine and human authority to exalt himself above every god.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB follows Elliott in seeing the desire of women as a reference to the Messiah. Jewish women longed to be mothers because of the promised seed of the woman. Antiochus sets aside even this deepest human longing, just as he regards no god at all.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil-Delitzsch argues that the “desire of women” is not a goddess but the love of women itself. The king rejects not only ancestral religion but all human tenderness, including conjugal love, as he exalts himself above everything, both divine and human. This fits a pattern of total arrogance.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange argues that the remarkably detailed historical predictions in this chapter, especially the wars between the northern and southern kingdoms, point to later Maccabean-era interpolation rather than genuine sixth-century prophecy. For him, the exact correspondence with Seleucid and Ptolemaic history is too precise to be authentic prediction.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry focuses on the character of Antiochus Epiphanes as a "vile person" who seizes power through flattery and deceit rather than rightful honor. He observes that Antiochus directs his treachery especially against the holy covenant, using lies and betrayal to attack God's people, yet all his schemes remain under God's sovereign timetable and ultimately do not prosper.