Yo Designs, been there, done that. Here is some of the stuff I unearthed, for those that are interested in the topic. These phrases are called eschatological markers and this is what some had to say concerning the subject:
’acharith hayyamim = latter (part of the) days
’acharith = end, issue: spatial meaning, hind part of cow, remote sea (cf. Ps. 139:9); temporal meaning, end (of the year), in future days, outcome, result, in the end, finally. Antonym: qêdêm (= formerly).
The formulaic expression be’acharith hayyamim is generally used in the sense “time to come” (e.g., Gen. 49:1), then the “future”, and “the end of time” as we know it (e.g., Isa. 2:2; Mic. 4:1; Hos. 3:5; Ezek. 38:16; Dan. 2:28; 10:14). See TDOT, vol. VI, p. 19.
According to the editors of TWOT, “E. H. Wolff likens the Hebrew conception of time to the situation of a man rowing a boat. He sees the past as before him (qêdêm); the future is behind his back (’acharith).” The interpretation depends on the context. It is possible to use the latter for the eschaton as well as the general future because obviously all eschatology is future, but not all future is eschatology. In the majority of cases the phrase “(in) the latter part of the days” could be defined as “the end of human history as we know it” (cf. Jer. 30:24; Is. 2:2; Mic. 4:1; Ez. 38:8, 16). More specifically, in the book of Daniel: “(God in heaven) has made known to King Nebuchadnezzar what will be in the ’acharith of the days (2:28). The point of the vision does not lie in the course of future events, but in the destruction of the colossus and in the coming of an indestructible kingdom (v. 44). Thus the outcome of the future is what is intended, and not the future in general. Similarly, 10:14 says: “I (the angel that had appeared) came to make you understand what is to befall your people in (at) the ’acharith of the days. For the vision is for days yet to come.” Since the following material deals with the stages of history from Cyrus to Antiochus IV, the meaning “future” cannot be excluded here; but the real purpose of the vision is to show how history will culminate, thus its outcome. Therefore, this passage has in mind the end, and not merely the future.” (TDOT, vol. I, pp. 211, 212)
Daniel asked, “what will be the final part of these things?” (cf. Dan. 12:8) The reference to “after(wards)” does not necessarily point to a chronological end, but “to show how history will culminate, thus its outcome” (TDOT, vol. I, p. 212). Such a biblical concept is not far-fetched at all. A similar view is held by political economist and author, Francis Fukuyama. In his 1992 book The End of History and the Last Man, he wrote: “What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.”
`eith qeits = end time
`eith : “time”. (Sept. 162 times kairos, 26 times houra, twice khronos). Time of judgement, time of the end (Is. 13:22 of Babel; Ez. 22:3 of Jerusalem), time of final punishment (Ez. 21:30, 34; 35:5).
qeits : “end”. The noun qes derives from the common Semitic root qtsts “cut off”, “cut to pieces”, end, temporal (period of time), 1) end (of lifetime), 2) period of time, 3) historical period, 4) eschatology, or spatial, end (edges) of earth, heavens, cf. Jer. 49:36. Antonym: ro’sh (= beginning).
Historical period : Often qeits denotes a specific span of time in the past or future. The expression `eith `äwon qeits (Ez. 21:30, 34 [25, 29]; 35:5) refers to the period of the monarchy, which ended with the destruction of Jerusalem on account of Israel’s sins. Similarly, in Dan. 9:26 the phrase weqitstsou bashshêthêph we`adh qeits milhhâmâh is to be understood as referring to a historical period of devastating wars that mark the culmination of divine judgement.
The connotation “historical period” or “age” is sometimes, as above, made explicit by association with other temporal terms: qeits par. `eith (Jer. 50:26, 27; Ez. 7:6, 7), `eith qeits (Dan. 8:17; 11:35, 40; 12:4, 9); inverted qeits hâ`ittîm (Dan. 11:13; expanded: Ez. 35:5) or made manifest by added terms kî-`odh lammou`eidh (Dan. 11:35)… The phrase weyâpheiahh laqqeits in Hab. 2:3, explained by `oudh hâzoun lammou’eidh, refers to an event expected to occur in the near future kî-bo’ yâbhou’ lo’ ye’ahheir, not in an apocalyptic time frame. This historical interpretation is reflected in 1QpHab. 7:1ff. (cf. TDOT, vol. XIII, pp. 82, 83).
Time of [the] end (= [the] end time): This phrase occurs six times in the Bible and is exclusive to the book of Daniel. “The expression qes in the book of Daniel (8:17, 19; 11:35, 40; 12:4, 9; cf. Hab. 2:3) clearly aims to convey a juxtaposition of the present and the eschatological future; for, although “the time of the final phase” refers primarily to the period of persecution by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, this period is also the time of tribulation that marks the opening phase of the eschaton” (TDOT, vol. XI, p. 450). Daniel had to seal the book till the “end time”. From there he would “go toward the end”, i.e., rest, and then stand up to collect his reward (cf. Dan. 12:4, 9, 13).
Eschatology : Only in a few late biblical texts does qeits occur in an eschatological context. The expression laqqeits and leqeits hayyamîn in Dnl. 12:13 clearly refer to the “end of time”. This does not mean that time will stop, but that history as we know it, will come to an end. In this context the phrase qeits happelâ’outh in verse 6 can also be interpreted eschatologically; but the meaning “appointed age” is preferable to an eschatological interpretation. The expression qeits happelâ’outh anticipates a “wonderful age,” the beginning of which is determined by preceding period of “two and a half times” (v. 7). In Ezk. 7:2-6, similarly, (haq)qeits denotes an age of destined punishment of the people (cf. vv. 7-8, qâroubh miqqâroubh); and Amos 8:2 should not be equated with the eschatological “day of Yahweh” of Amos 5:18ff. (TDOT, vol. XIII, p. 83)
Coming back to the book of Daniel, according to the angel, the big horn or fierce king, later introduced as King of the South, will stand up during the “[the] end time” (cf. Dan. 7:9, 10, 13, 14, 20, 26, 27; 8:17, 19). This King will then become involved in a final military confrontation with the King of the North, a most trying time for God’s people (cf. Dan. 11:35, 40). During this time Michael will stand up (as king), his people will escape, and [true] knowledge will become abundant as the seal on the book of Daniel is broken (Dan. 7:13, 14; 8:26; 9:24; 12:1, 4, 9). The big horn and fierce king, alias King of the South, will then be destroyed, broken without a [human] hand (cf. Dan. 7:26; 8:25b). A similar fate awaits the King of the North. He will come “all the way to his end, and there will be no helper for him” (Dan. 11:45; cf. 2:44, 45).
As seen, the phrase “[the] end time” corresponds closely to “latter (part of the) days” (cf. Dan. 8:19). But according to available evidence, there appears to be a slight variation between the two. This involves duration. Whereas t he “end” (= cutting off) brings finality to the phrase “[the] end time” (emphasis on “end”, thus “conclusion”), the word ’acharith adds a continuous element to “after(wards)”, or “latter (or final) part of the days” (emphasis on “latter”, thus “future”) . In other words, “[th e] end time” will conclude with the battle of Armageddon (cf. Rev. 16:14, 16; 19:19-21), whilst the period covering the “latter part of the days” will stretch into the millennium (cf. Dan. 2:28, 44; 10:14). The relatively short “end time” should therefore be incorporated into the longer “latter part of the days” (cf. Dan. 8:19; 12:8, 9).
