::::::::Til Eulegenspil says, "the Antiochus interpretation is but one of many", and he is wrong. My study Bible says that it's "doubtless" that the "prince who is to come" is Antiochus. My Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church says that it's the consensus of modern, critical scholars that Daniel was written in the 160s BC. TE wants the consensus of scholarly opinion to be treated as merely an opinion, and that's a violation of WP:NPOV. TE has a history of trying to value his own viewpoint with the consensus viewpoint (as if they're both merely "viewpoints"). Let me know if you need any special help to enforce WP policy on a page where TE is violating it.