| Line 58: |
Line 58: |
| | :(12) Michael shall stand up for the people of God: with other things relating to Antichrist, and the end of the world. | | :(12) Michael shall stand up for the people of God: with other things relating to Antichrist, and the end of the world. |
| | Part three, historical narratives: | | Part three, historical narratives: |
| − | :(13) The history of Susanna and the two elders. | + | :(13) The history of Susanna and the two elders. (<small>Septuagint Chapter 1 ''Prologue;'' Vulgate Chapter 13</small>) |
| | :(14) The history of Bel, and of the great serpent worshipped by the Babylonians. | | :(14) The history of Bel, and of the great serpent worshipped by the Babylonians. |
| | | | |
| Line 246: |
Line 246: |
| | ===Judge for yourself=== | | ===Judge for yourself=== |
| | | | |
| − | The appeal to readers to "see for themselves" if the deuterocanonical portions of Daniel "seem to them" to be inspired is a example of the logical fallacy of "''[[Appeal to personal interest]]''", which appeals to the individual reader's sense of personal integrity and self-reliance, and erroneously implies that the personal judgment of the reader can be relied upon as infallibly correct.<ref name=Private/> It dismisses all possibility of an informed and authentic external authority that can truly be trusted as more reliable than personal judgment, it sets the reader apart from and above the whole of the Christian community, and it makes the individual reader the final arbiter and judge of the books of the Bible. This is a seductive appeal to individual pride and vanity. [http://biblehub.com/multi/proverbs/3-5.htm Proverbs 3:5] [http://biblehub.com/multi/isaiah/5-21.htm Isaiah 5:21] [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=sirach%203:24&version=NRSVCE Sirach 3:24] | + | The appeal to readers to "read for themselves" to see if the deuterocanonical portions of Daniel "seem to them" to be inspired is a example of the logical fallacy of "''[[Appeal to personal interest]]''", which appeals to the individual reader's sense of personal integrity and self-reliance, and erroneously implies that the personal judgment of the reader can be relied upon as infallibly correct.<ref name=Private/> It dismisses all possibility of an informed and authentic external authority that can truly be trusted as more reliable than personal judgment, it sets the reader apart from and above the whole of the Christian community, and it makes the individual reader the final arbiter and judge of the books of the Bible. This is a seductive appeal to individual pride and vanity. [http://biblehub.com/multi/proverbs/3-5.htm Proverbs 3:5] [http://biblehub.com/multi/isaiah/5-21.htm Isaiah 5:21] [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=sirach%203:24&version=NRSVCE Sirach 3:24] |
| | | | |
| | Churches in [[Apostolic succession]] see in their doctrine and practice a sure and biblical means of receiving and perpetuating the Faith from one generation to another. Apostolic Succession requires a "tactile," person to person, conferring of authority from the Apostles onward. The practice originated in the late first century. It requires the most heightened responsibility in the giving and receiving. It is believed that the grace of the Holy Spirit is transmitted by the laying on of hands at the time of ordination. Not all Christians have the gift of discernment. [http://biblehub.com/multi/romans/13-1.htm Romans 13:1] [http://biblehub.com/multi/hebrews/13-17.htm Hebrews 13:17] [http://biblehub.com/multi/2_timothy/1-14.htm 2 Timothy 1:14] [http://biblehub.com/multi/2_peter/1-19.htm 2 Peter 1:19], also [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jude%201:3&version=KJV Jude 3] and [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jude%201:17-19&version=KJV 17-19]. See also [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1corinthians%2012:4-11&version=KJV 1 Corinthians 12:4-11] and [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1corinthians%2012:28-30&version=KJV 28-30] | | Churches in [[Apostolic succession]] see in their doctrine and practice a sure and biblical means of receiving and perpetuating the Faith from one generation to another. Apostolic Succession requires a "tactile," person to person, conferring of authority from the Apostles onward. The practice originated in the late first century. It requires the most heightened responsibility in the giving and receiving. It is believed that the grace of the Holy Spirit is transmitted by the laying on of hands at the time of ordination. Not all Christians have the gift of discernment. [http://biblehub.com/multi/romans/13-1.htm Romans 13:1] [http://biblehub.com/multi/hebrews/13-17.htm Hebrews 13:17] [http://biblehub.com/multi/2_timothy/1-14.htm 2 Timothy 1:14] [http://biblehub.com/multi/2_peter/1-19.htm 2 Peter 1:19], also [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jude%201:3&version=KJV Jude 3] and [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jude%201:17-19&version=KJV 17-19]. See also [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1corinthians%2012:4-11&version=KJV 1 Corinthians 12:4-11] and [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1corinthians%2012:28-30&version=KJV 28-30] |
| Line 269: |
Line 269: |
| | After the death of Nebuchadnezzar/Nabuchodonosor (561 B.C.), the book simply intimates in Daniel, 5:11 ''and following'', that he lost his high position at the court and lived long in retirement. But afterward, at the scene of revelry in Belshazzar/Baltasar's palace, on the eve of Cyrus's conquest of Babylon (538 B.C.), while Baltasar (Hebrew ''Belsh’aççar'', corresponding to Babylonian ''Balâtsu-usur'', "Bel protect the king") and his lords feasted, impiously drinking their wine from precious vessels which had been taken from the Temple at Jerusalem, there appeared the fingers of a man writing on the wall: "Mane, Thecel, Phares". None of the king's wise men was able to interpret these mysterious words, which Daniel, who at length had been summoned, translated and explained. For his reward Belshazzar, the second in the kingdom ([[Nabonidus]] was first in rank), made Daniel the third ruler in the kingdom [http://biblehub.com/multi/daniel/5-29.htm Daniel 5:29.] The prophet, now at least eighty years of age, remained in that exalted position under Darius the Mede, possibly to be identified with Darius Hystaspes (485 B.C.) though some disagree. When Darius thought of setting Daniel over all the kingdom (6:4), Daniel's fellow-ministers of state, fearing such an elevation, sought his ruin by convicting him of disloyalty to the Crown. They secured from the king a decree forbidding anyone to ask any petition of either god or man, except the monarch, for thirty days, under penalty of being cast into the lions' den. Daniel nevertheless prayed, three times a day, at his open window, towards Jerusalem. They reported this to the king, and coerced him into applying the threatened punishment for violation of the decree. When Darius saw Daniel's miraculous preservation in the lions' den, he published a decree that all in his realm should honour and revere the God of Daniel, proclaiming that He is "the living and eternal God". Daniel continued to prosper through the rest of the reign of Darius, and in that of his successor, Cyrus the Persian (chapter 6). | | After the death of Nebuchadnezzar/Nabuchodonosor (561 B.C.), the book simply intimates in Daniel, 5:11 ''and following'', that he lost his high position at the court and lived long in retirement. But afterward, at the scene of revelry in Belshazzar/Baltasar's palace, on the eve of Cyrus's conquest of Babylon (538 B.C.), while Baltasar (Hebrew ''Belsh’aççar'', corresponding to Babylonian ''Balâtsu-usur'', "Bel protect the king") and his lords feasted, impiously drinking their wine from precious vessels which had been taken from the Temple at Jerusalem, there appeared the fingers of a man writing on the wall: "Mane, Thecel, Phares". None of the king's wise men was able to interpret these mysterious words, which Daniel, who at length had been summoned, translated and explained. For his reward Belshazzar, the second in the kingdom ([[Nabonidus]] was first in rank), made Daniel the third ruler in the kingdom [http://biblehub.com/multi/daniel/5-29.htm Daniel 5:29.] The prophet, now at least eighty years of age, remained in that exalted position under Darius the Mede, possibly to be identified with Darius Hystaspes (485 B.C.) though some disagree. When Darius thought of setting Daniel over all the kingdom (6:4), Daniel's fellow-ministers of state, fearing such an elevation, sought his ruin by convicting him of disloyalty to the Crown. They secured from the king a decree forbidding anyone to ask any petition of either god or man, except the monarch, for thirty days, under penalty of being cast into the lions' den. Daniel nevertheless prayed, three times a day, at his open window, towards Jerusalem. They reported this to the king, and coerced him into applying the threatened punishment for violation of the decree. When Darius saw Daniel's miraculous preservation in the lions' den, he published a decree that all in his realm should honour and revere the God of Daniel, proclaiming that He is "the living and eternal God". Daniel continued to prosper through the rest of the reign of Darius, and in that of his successor, Cyrus the Persian (chapter 6). |
| | | | |
| − | These are the only facts which may be gathered for a biography of the Prophet Daniel from the narrative portion of his book (1–6). Few other facts can be drawn from the second, distinctly apocalyptic, portion of the book (7–12). The visions there represent him chiefly as a seer favored with Divine communications about the future punishment of the Gentile powers and the ultimate setting up of the Messianic Kingdom. These revelations are given in the reigns of Darius, Belshazzar/Baltasar, and Cyrus, and are explained to him by the Angel [[Gabriel (archangel)|Gabriel]] in increasingly clearer disclosures of what is to happen in "the time of the end". In the deuterocanonical appendix to his book (13–14), Daniel reappears in the same general character as in the first part of his work (1–6). Chapter 13 sets him forth as an inspired youth whose superior wisdom puts to shame and secures the punishment of the false accusers of the chaste Susanna. The concluding chapter (14) represents Daniel as a fearless and most successful champion of the true and living God, telling the history of the destruction of two Babylonian idols, Bel and the dragon. Outside of the Book of Daniel, the Bible has few references to the prophet of that name. Ezechiel (14:14) speaks of Daniel, together with Noah and Job, as a pattern of righteousness and, in chapter 28:3, as the representative of perfect wisdom. The writer of the First Book of Maccabees (2:60) refers to his deliverance out of the mouth of the lions, and St. Matthew (24:15) to "the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet". Jewish tradition had been attempting to complete the meagre account of Daniel's life as supplied by the Sacred Scriptures. The tradition of the Jews, accepted by many Fathers of the Church, states that he was made a eunuch in Babylon. Other Jewish traditions represent him as refusing divine honors proffered to him by Nebuchadnezzar/Nabuchodonosor; they explain the reason why he was not forced with his three friends to worship that prince's statue in the plain of Dura (Daniel 3), was that he had been sent away by the king, who wanted to spare Daniel's life, for he knew full well that the prophet would never agree to commit such an act of idolatry; they also give many fanciful details, as for instance concerning what happened to Daniel in the lions' den. Others endeavour to account for what they assume to be a fact, that Yahweh's devout prophet apparently did not return to God's land and city after the decree of restoration issued by Cyrus; while others again assert that he actually went back to Judea and died there. Equally incredible and conflicting legends concerning Daniel's life and place of burial are found in Arabic literature, although his name is not mentioned in the Koran. During the Middle Ages a widespread and persistent tradition held that Daniel was buried at Susa, the modern Shuster, in the Persian province of Khuzistan. In the account of his visit to Susa in A.D. 1165, Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela narrates that Daniel's tomb was shown him in the façade of one of the synagogues of that city; and it is shown there to the present day. | + | These are the only facts which may be gathered for a biography of the Prophet Daniel from the narrative portion of his book (1–6). Few other facts can be drawn from the second, distinctly apocalyptic, portion of the book (7–12), written in the first-person by Daniel. The visions there represent him chiefly as a seer favored with Divine communications about the future punishment of the Gentile powers and the ultimate setting up of the Messianic Kingdom. These revelations are given in the reigns of Darius, Belshazzar/Baltasar, and Cyrus, and are explained to him by the Angel [[Gabriel (archangel)|Gabriel]] in increasingly clearer disclosures of what is to happen in "the time of the end". In the deuterocanonical appendix to his book (13–14), Daniel reappears in the same general character as in the first part of his work (1–6). Chapter 13 sets him forth as an inspired youth whose superior wisdom puts to shame and secures the punishment of the false accusers of the chaste Susanna. The concluding chapter (14) represents Daniel as a fearless and most successful champion of the true and living God, telling the history of the destruction of two Babylonian idols, Bel and the dragon. Outside of the Book of Daniel, the Bible has few references to the prophet of that name. Ezechiel (14:14) speaks of Daniel, together with Noah and Job, as a pattern of righteousness and, in chapter 28:3, as the representative of perfect wisdom. The writer of the First Book of Maccabees (2:60) refers to his deliverance out of the mouth of the lions, and St. Matthew (24:15) to "the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet". Jewish tradition had been attempting to complete the meagre account of Daniel's life as supplied by the Sacred Scriptures. The tradition of the Jews, accepted by many Fathers of the Church, states that he was made a eunuch in Babylon. Other Jewish traditions represent him as refusing divine honors proffered to him by Nebuchadnezzar/Nabuchodonosor; they explain the reason why he was not forced with his three friends to worship that prince's statue in the plain of Dura (Daniel 3), was that he had been sent away by the king, who wanted to spare Daniel's life, for he knew full well that the prophet would never agree to commit such an act of idolatry; they also give many fanciful details, as for instance concerning what happened to Daniel in the lions' den. Others endeavour to account for what they assume to be a fact, that Yahweh's devout prophet apparently did not return to God's land and city after the decree of restoration issued by Cyrus; while others again assert that he actually went back to Judea and died there. Equally incredible and conflicting legends concerning Daniel's life and place of burial are found in Arabic literature, although his name is not mentioned in the Koran. During the Middle Ages a widespread and persistent tradition held that Daniel was buried at Susa, the modern Shuster, in the Persian province of Khuzistan. In the account of his visit to Susa in A.D. 1165, Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela narrates that Daniel's tomb was shown him in the façade of one of the synagogues of that city; and it is shown there to the present day. |
| | | | |
| | ===The text=== | | ===The text=== |
| | | | |
| − | The author of Bel and the Dragon is not known, not even speculated, and the date of the writing is indeterminable. Theories abound about the date of writing but most of these entangle themselves in the heretical dating of the book of Daniel into the 2nd Century B.C. rather than its obvious dating from the hand of Daniel in the 534 B.C.. There is much ado about how the scholarly infidels date Bible books. They do not acknowledge the supernatural future telling of prophecy, therefore they presumptuously date each book after the prophecy was fulfilled, therefore they are justly titled infidel. There is much ado about giving conservative answer to these pointed dating theories. I don't much hold to dwelling on rebuttals to infidels, taking Proverbs 26:4 above Proverbs 26:5 in the case of such outspoken infidelity<ref>PRO 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. PRO 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.</ref> In Hill and Waltons Survey of the Old Testament Introduction to the book of Daniel (and throughout their whole survey) there is this horribly excessive treatment of the 'scholars' who support bogus dating of Bible books.<ref>Hill, Andrew E. and Walton, John H. A Survey of the Old Testament Pg. 349</ref> When extensive argument is given to refute the infidels fictitious dating and critical treatment of the Bible it seems to lend them more credence than they are due.<ref>The bogus dating that is rampant in the work of 'modern scholars has its roots in their preconceived notion of a bible that evolved from man. As evolution of a species requires the fabrication of millions of years of evolution, so the evolution of a bible requires that the scholars manufacture hundreds of years of folk lore and legend prior to the written record being made. Thus the suitable title of infidel for all those who stretch out dates and compound authorship.</ref> Let it only be said here that the dating methods used by 'modern scholars' on any manuscript are to be treated as suspect, subjective and with little credence. It is quite logical that the book was written during the captivity, and that no cheating trick was made to make it look ancient. The major contention is not when it was written. It is not of major concern even if it was written the day Daniel got out of the lions den. The problem with the account is its authenticity, was it written by Daniel, and/or its authority, was it written by one in the know, and in the control of God. | + | The author of chapters 1:1–7:1 (according to their numbering in the Vulgate Bible) is unknown. He may have been a disciple of the Prophet. Chapters 7:2–12:13 are presented as first-person narratives written by Daniel himself. |
| | | | |
| − | Critics of the Book of Daniel who base their datings of the time of writing on extant 2nd century B.C. hand-copied manuscripts almost entirely ignore the fact that after Daniel wrote it, the book was sealed and kept hidden "until the time of the end". [http://biblehub.com/multi/daniel/12-4.htm Daniel 12:4] and [http://biblehub.com/multi/daniel/12-9.htm 12:9] This is why no textual manuscript evidence for the book predates the 2nd century B.C.. We know about the book and its inspired content only because it had finally been unsealed; immediately handwritten manuscript copies were made and distributed to be read to the assemblies of the people beginning the 2nd century B.C. as proof that all that had happened had been prophesied. (A parallel example is found in [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isaiah%2044:24-45:7&version=KJV Isaiah 44:24-45:7].) The Book of Daniel is an extreme historical example of handwritten ''posthumous publication''.
| + | The author of chapter 14 about Daniel's defeat of Bel and the Dragon is not known, not even speculated, and the date of the writing is indeterminable. Theories abound about the date of writing but most of these entangle themselves in the liberalist scholarly dating of the book of Daniel into the 2nd Century B.C. rather than its stated dating from the hand of Daniel, in 534 B.C.. |
| | | | |
| − | With respect to the genuineness and authenticity of the book, there is the strongest evidence, both internal and external. We have the testimony of Christ himself, Matthew 24:15; of St. John and St. Paul, who have copied his prophecies; of the Jewish church and nation, who have constantly received this book as canonical; of Josephus, who recommends him as the greatest of the prophets; and of the Jewish Targets and Talmuds, which frequently cite his authority. As to the internal evidence, the style, the language, the manner of writing, perfectly agree with the age; and especially, he is proved to have been a prophet by the exact fulfilment of his predictions. This book, like that of Ezra, is written partly in Hebrew, and partly in Chaldee, the prevailing language of the Babylonians, and translated for the Jews of the Diaspora into Greek, the prevailing language of the entire [[Levant]] and middle east from the 2nd century B.C. through the 1st century of Christianity.
| + | Scholars with a [[liberal bias]] do not acknowledge the supernatural foreknowledge of any written prophecy, presumptively dating each book as having been written after the prophecy was fulfilled. Conservative responses to these pointed dating theories take Proverbs 26:4 above Proverbs 26:5 in the case of such outspoken one-sided opinions <ref>Proverbs 26:4 "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him." Proverbs 26:5 "Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.</ref> In Hill and Waltons ''Survey of the Old Testament Introduction to the book of Daniel'' (and throughout their whole survey) excessive weight is given the 'scholars' who support the latest possible speculative dating of Bible books.<ref>Hill, Andrew E. and Walton, John H. ''A Survey of the Old Testament'' page 349.</ref> When extensive argument is given to refute their dating and critical treatment of the Bible it seems to lend them more credence than they are due.<ref>See [http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/protest+too+much TheFreeDicionary: idioms: protest too much] (thefreedictionary.com), [http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=thou+doth+protest+too+much Urban Dictionary: "thou doth protest too much"], [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/the_lady_doth_protest_too_much wiktionary: the lady doth protest too much] (wiktionary.org)</ref> Many modern scholars have a preconceived notion of a bible that evolved from man. As evolution of a species requires the fabrication of ''millions of years'' of evolution, so the premise of evolution of a bible requires that the scholars similarly manufacture and collect hundreds of years of folklore and legend as being prior to the written Biblical record. In support of their opinions they stretch out dates and propose compounded multiple authorship. The ''proposed conclusions'' constructed from abuse of ''legitimate'' historical-critical dating methods by some "modern scholars" on any manuscript can be treated as suspect, as subjective and as having little substantive credibility, based on a long history of evidential findings of slanted scholarship by peer-reviewed journals of biblical studies.<ref>Documented evidence of a long history of biased scholarly research findings—see the following: |
| | + | *[https://www.umass.edu/wsp/history/outline/bias.html Approaching history: Bias] (umass.edu) |
| | + | *[http://ist-socrates.berkeley.edu/~maccoun/ar_bias.html Biases in the Interpretation and use of Research Results—Robert J. MacCoun. Richard and Rhoda Goldman School of Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720-7320, maccoun@socrates.berkeley.edu]—<blockquote>"The first prototype is fraud-intentional, conscious efforts to fabricate, conceal, or distort evidence, for whatever reason-material gain, enhancing one's professional reputation, protecting one's theories, or influencing a political debate. There is a growing literature on such cases (see Fuchs & Westervelt, 1996; Woodward & Goodstein, 1996), though we still lack good estimates of their prevalence. At a macro level, they are often explicable from sociological, economic, or historical perspectives (Cole, 1992; Zuckerman, 1988). At a micro level, they are sometimes explicable in terms of individual psychopathology. These cases are extremely serious..."</blockquote></ref> (See [[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)#"illegitimate historical-critical findings".|Historical-critical method: "illegitimate historical-critical findings"]]) It is quite logical that the book was composed and written during the captivity, and that no cheating trick was made to make it look ancient. The major contention is not when the Book of Daniel was written, even if it was written the day Daniel got out of the lions den. The problem with the account for the scholar is its authenticity, and/or its authority: was it written by Daniel, was it written by one in the know, and was it written by one in the control of God? |
| | | | |
| | + | Critics of the Book of Daniel who base their datings of the time of writing on extant 2nd century B.C. hand-copied manuscripts almost entirely ignore the fact that after Daniel wrote it, the book was sealed and kept hidden "until the time of the end". [http://biblehub.com/multi/daniel/12-4.htm Daniel 12:4] and [http://biblehub.com/multi/daniel/12-9.htm 12:9] This is why no textual manuscript evidence for the book predates the 2nd century B.C.. We know about the book and its inspired content only because it had finally been unsealed; then immediately handwritten manuscript copies were made and distributed to be read to the assemblies of the people beginning the 2nd century B.C. as proof that all that had happened had been prophesied. (A parallel example is found in [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isaiah%2044:24-45:7&version=KJV Isaiah 44:24-45:7].) The Book of Daniel is an extreme historical example of handwritten ''posthumous publication''. |
| | + | |
| | + | There is the strongest evidence respecting the genuineness and authenticity of the book, both internal and external. We have the testimony of Christ himself, [http://biblehub.com/multi/matthew/24-15.htm Matthew 24:15]; of St. John and St. Paul, who have copied his prophecies; of the Jewish synagogue and nation, who have constantly received this book as canonical but have never ranked it among the Prophets; of Josephus, who recommends him as the greatest of the prophets; and of the Jewish ''tannaim'' and ''amoraim'', which frequently in the Talmud cite his authority. As to the internal evidence, the style, language, and manner of writing perfectly agree with the historical period represented from Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon into the reigns of Cyrus and Darius of Persia; and especially, Daniel is proved to have been a prophet by the exact fulfilment of his predictions. This book, like that of Ezra, is written partly in Hebrew, and partly in Chaldee, the prevailing language of the Babylonians, and translated in its entirety into Greek for the Jews of the Diaspora, the prevailing language of the entire [[Levant]] and middle east from the 2nd century B.C. through the 1st century of Christianity. |
| | | | |
| | ==[[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)|Historical-critical]] textual analysis== | | ==[[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)|Historical-critical]] textual analysis== |
| Line 284: |
Line 289: |
| | —Critical View: | | —Critical View: |
| | | | |
| − | One of the books of the Old Testament. It may be divided into two parts: chapters i.-vi., recounting the events of Daniel's life; chapters vii.-xii., containing his prophecies. "While the first part proves that it is impossible for the world-empire to belong to the heathen forever, the second part shows that Israel is destined to found this world empire through the son of man, who has long since existed in heaven" (J. Böhmer, "Reich Gottes und Menschensohnim Buche Daniel," 1899, p. 60). | + | One of the books of the Old Testament. It may be divided into two parts: chapters 1–6, recounting the earlier events of Daniel's life; chapters 7–12, containing his prophecies, and an appendix containing the ''Prologue'' of his youth and the events of his last years under Darius. "While the first part proves that it is impossible for the world-empire to belong to the heathen forever, the second part shows that Israel is destined to found this world empire through the son of man, who has long since existed in heaven" (J. Böhmer, "''Reich Gottes und Menschensohnim Buche Daniel,''" 1899, p. 60). |
| − | | |
| − | The added episodes of Susanna, Bel, and the Dragon, found only in the Greek version, are edifying short stories with a didactic purpose (chaps. 13–14). The Greek version also adds a long prayer, numbered in the NAB and the Greek, 3:24–90, between 3:23–24 in the Hebrew text.
| |
| | | | |
| | + | The rabbinically added episodes of Susanna, Bel, and the Dragon, found only in the Greek version, are edifying short stories with a didactic purpose (chaps. 13–14). The Greek version also includes a prayer and a hymn of praise, numbered in the NAB and the Greek, 3:24–90, between 3:23 and 3:24 in the shorter "Hebrew" (Aramaic) text. |
| | | | |
| − | This is a mixture of history and prophecy. The wonders related are of a peculiar and striking character, and were designed to show the people of God that, amid their degeneracy, the Lord's hand was not shortened that it could not save; and also to exhibit to their enemies that there was an essential difference between Jehovah and idols, between the people of God and the world. The prophecies contained in the latter part of the book extend from the days of Daniel to the general resurrection. The Assyrian, the Persian, the Grecian, and the Roman empires are described under appropriate imagery. The precise time of Christ's coming is told; the rise and the fall of antichrist, and the duration of his power, are accurately determined; the victory of Christ over his enemies, and the universal prevalence of his religion are clearly pointed out. The book is filled with the most exalted sentiments of piety and devout gratitude. Its style is simple, clear, and concise, and many of the prophecies are delivered in language so plain and circumstantial, that some infidels have asserted that they were written after the events they described had taken place. Sir Isaac Newton regards Daniel as the most distinct and plain of all the prophets, and most easy to be understood; and therefore considers that in things relating to the last times, he is to be regarded as the key to the other prophets.
| + | The book is a mixture of history and prophecy. The wonders related have a peculiar and striking character, designed to show the people of God that, amid their degradation, the Lord's hand is not so shortened that it cannot save; also to exhibit to their enemies that there is an essential difference between יהוה L<small>ORD</small> and idols, between the people of God and the world. The prophecies of the latter part of the book extend from the days of Daniel to the general resurrection. The Assyrian, the Persian, the Grecian, and the Roman empires, or the Babylonian, the Medan, the Persian and the Grecian empires (the "little horn" as Antiochus IV) are described under appropriate imagery. The precise time of Christ's coming is told; the rise and the fall of antichrist, and the duration of his power, are accurately determined; the victory of Christ over his enemies, and the universal prevalence of his religion are clearly pointed out. The book is filled with the most exalted sentiments of piety and devout gratitude. Its style is simple, clear, and concise, and many of the prophecies are delivered in language so plain and circumstantial, that some radical scholars have asserted that they were written after the events they described had taken place, since it is obvious that no one can accurately predict the future (the [[fallacy of exclusion]], also called "[[cherry picking]]" <ref>[http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/66-cherry-picking Logical Fallacies: cherry picking] (logicallyfallacious.com)</ref>). Sir Isaac Newton regards Daniel as the most distinct and plain of all the prophets, and most easy to be understood; and therefore considers that in things relating to the last times, he is to be regarded as the key to the other prophets. |
| | | | |
| − | Strictly speaking, the book does not belong to the prophetic writings but rather to a distinctive type of literature known as “apocalyptic,” of which it is an early specimen. Apocalyptic writing first appears about 200 B.C. and flourished among Jews and Christians down to the Middle Ages, especially in times of persecution. Apocalyptic literature has its roots in the older teaching of the prophets, who often pointed ahead to the day of the Lord, the consummation of history. For both prophet and apocalyptist there was one Lord of history, who would ultimately vindicate the chosen people. Apocalyptic also has roots in the wisdom tradition. Daniel has the gift of discernment from God. Greek wisdom (represented by the Babylonian “magicians and enchanters”) is ridiculed (see especially chaps. 2 and 5), whereas God reveals hidden things to faithful servants.
| + | The book does not belong strictly to the prophetic writings but is rather an early specimen of a distinctive type of literature called "apocalyptic". Apocalyptic literature first appeared about 200 B.C. and flourished among Jews and Christians down to the Middle Ages, especially in times of persecution. The genre has its roots in the older teaching of the prophets, who often pointed ahead to the consummation of history, the [[End Times|Day of the Lord]]. Both prophet and apocalyptist testify to one Lord of history, who will repeatedly and also ultimately vindicate his chosen people. Apocalyptic also has roots in the wisdom tradition. Daniel's gift of discerning wisdom is from God alone. By contrast the pagan wisdom of the gentiles (represented by the Babylonian "magicians and enchanters") is worthy of ridicule (see especially chapters 2 and 5), whereas God reveals hidden things to his faithful servants that cannot be known by reason alone. |
| | | | |
| − | There follows in chaps. 7–12 a series of visions promising deliverance and glory to the Jews in the days to come. The great nations of the ancient world have risen in vain against the Lord; his kingdom shall overthrow existing powers and last forever; in the end the dead will be raised for reward or punishment. Under this apocalyptic imagery some of the best elements of prophetic and sapiential teaching are synthesized: the insistence on right conduct, the divine control over events, the certainty that the kingdom of God will ultimately triumph and humanity attain the goal intended for it at the beginning of creation. The arrival of the kingdom is a central theme of the gospels, where Jesus is identified as the human figure (or “Son of Man”) who appears in Daniel’s vision in chap. 7. The message in both parts of the first twelve chapters (i.e., chaps. 1–6 and chaps. 7–12) is that history unrolls under the watchful eye of God, who does not abandon those who trust in him and will finally deliver and re-establish them. Moreover, it can be pointed out that chaps. 2 and 7 present the same teaching in different symbolism; 2:31 even describes the king’s dream as a “vision.”
| + | Chapters 7–12 present a series of visions promising deliverance and glory to the Jews in the days to come. The great nations of the ancient world have risen in vain against the Lord; his kingdom shall overthrow existing powers and last forever; in the end the dead will be raised for reward or punishment. Under this apocalyptic imagery some of the best elements of prophetic and [http://www.thefreedictionary.com/wisdom+literature sapiential teaching] are synthesized: insistence on right conduct (''works''), divine control over events, certainty that the kingdom of God will ultimately triumph and humanity will attain the fullness of the destiny intended for it at the beginning of creation. The arrival of the kingdom is a central theme of the Christian Gospel. Jesus is identified as the human figure ("Son of Man") who appears in Daniel’s vision in chapter 7 ([http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%209:35-38&version=DRA John 9:35-38]). The message in both parts of the first twelve chapters (1–6 and 7–12) is that history unfolds under the sovereign rule of God, who never abandons those who trust in him and will finally deliver and re-establish them. Chapters 2 and 7 present the same teaching in different symbolic forms; 2:31 also describes the dream of the king himself as a "vision", as Pharaoh's dream in the Book of Genesis (41) was a vision [http://biblehub.com/multi/genesis/41-8.htm Genesis 41:8]. |
| | | | |
| | Form. | | Form. |