The Book of Daniel (Hebrew: דניאל) is a book in the Hebrew Bible. The book tells of how Daniel, and his Judean companions, were inducted into Babylon during Jewish exile, and how their positions elevated in the court of Nebuchadnezzar. The court tales span events that occur during the reigns of Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, and Darius the Mede. The book concludes with four Divine prophetic visions.
The introduction of the Book of Daniel is written in Hebrew, the body is written in Biblical Aramaic, then the Masoretic text concludes the book with a return to Hebrew.[1] The book consists of a series of six third-person narratives (chapters 1-6) followed by four apocalyptic visions in the first-person (chapters 7-12).
The most widely accepted critical view posits that the author of the text was an anonymous writer living in the Maccabean period under Antiochus IV Epiphanes, during the 2nd century BCE,[2] who compiled ancient legends with a pseudepigraph of "visions."[3][4] Other more conservative textual scholars, however, maintain with the historic Judeo-Christian tradition that Daniel, the protagonist of the narrative set in the 6th century BCE, is likely also the historical author of the text.[5]
The traditional theory that Daniel was the original author of the Book of Daniel is dismissed by critics who reject the book's prophetic claims.[5]Critics of Daniel view the Book of Daniel as a pseudepigraph dated around 165 BCE that concerns itself primarily with the Maccabean era and the reign of the Seleucid king Antiochus Epiphanes.[6] Those who share this view typically adhere to the Maccabean thesis when analyzing the Book of Daniel.[7] The stories of chapters 1-6 are considered to be a literary genre of legends that are older than the visions of chapters 7-12. The visions in the latter half of Daniel are theorized to be written by an anonymous author in the Maccabean era, who assembled the legends with the visions as one book, in the 2nd century BCE. According to this view, it is not considered to be read as a prophecy of western political history or of an eschatological future. Rather, the critical focus is on the witness to the religiosity of the Maccabean time period.[8]
Anonymous writer
Norman W. Porteous was one of the first to postulate that an anonymous writer wrote the book during the persecution under Antiochus. According to this theory, the anonymous author attributed these events to Daniel, as prophecies that were witnessed by this writer in the 2nd century BCE.[9][10]Paul Roche observes that the author abounded in mistakes and anachronisms, using Daniel as a symbol for the faithful Jew serving Yahweh, and the use of various pagan kings as symbols of heathenism.[11] Critics do, however, acknowledge that the author of Daniel was familiar with the history of Near Eastern imperial power from the sixth to the second centuries.[12] But, because the writer had an incomplete and erroneous view of historical details in the second half of the sixth century, Daniel’s era, such imbalances support the theory of a late date of writing.[12]
Encouragement under oppression
Porteous and Roche agree that the Book of Daniel is composed of folktales that were used to fortify the Jewish faith during a time of great persecution and oppression by the Hellenized Seleucids some four centuries after Babylonian captivity.[11][13] James VanderKam and Peter W. Flint further explain that the stories of Daniel and his friends, set in Babylon during the Exile, encouraged readers to remain faithful to God and to refuse compromise in the face of their oppressors, and offered the prospect of triumph over wickedness and idolatry. These themes may have brought encouragement to the Qumran covenanters who were persecuted by other Jews and also threatened by Hellenism.[14] However, from a conservative approach, Joyce G. Baldwin argued that "old, authentic stories would have provided comfort to sufferers of later generations far more convincingly than a book of new parables."[15]
Dating to Hellenistic period
The presence of three Greek loanwords that only occur in Daniel chapter 3, have supporters of a late date say that Daniel had to have been written after Alexander the Great’s conquest of the Orient, from 330 BCE. They claim that it would be impossible for Greek loanwords to appear two centuries before then.[12] These loanwords are three Greek musical terms. Frank Gaebelein argues that the non-existence of other Greek words does not support the theory of Daniel being written in the Hellenistic period. Gaebelein states that "it is inconceivable that Greek terms for government and administration would not have been adopted into Aramaic by the second century BC."[16] Even John Goldingay, a proponent of the late date, concedes, "the Greek words hardly necessitate a very late date."[17] The earliest known use of the Greek word symphonia, dates back to Pythagoras, born in the 6th century BCE, who has used the term. The adjectival use of symphonia meaning, "in unison", is found in the Hymni Homerica, ad Mercurium 51; both instances date from the 6th century BCE.[18][19]
Qumran 4QDanc
Use of the Aramaic language was also popular in the 2nd Century BCE and was widely spoken amongst Jews in Palestine. With the discovery of the Dead Sea scroll, Qumran, dating 125 BCE, it does not reassure critics that Daniel was written in the 2nd century BCE. Even the critic G. R. Driver recognized that "the presence and popularity of the Daniel manuscripts at Qumran" conflicted "with the modern view which advocates the late dating of the composition of Daniel". [Wegner, 116] This scroll contains the oldest reference to Daniel, only as an abbreviated text: a prayer of Daniel at (9:4b-19). 4QDanc does not strictly qualify as a copy of the book itself.[20]
Support for earlier authorship
Kenneth Kitchen, Louis F. Hartman and Alexander Di Lella, for example, date the Aramaic portion more broadly within the Persian period (i.e., before the 330s BC), as based on Persian loanwords.[21] There are about 19 Persian loanwords that occur in the Aramaic portions of the Book of Daniel.
Masoretic text and two longer Greek versions (the original Septuagint version, c. 100 BCE, and the later Theodotion version, c. 2nd century CE).[22] Both the Greek versions contain apocryphal chapters that are not found in the Masoretic text.
Greek versions
Theodotion's translation is much closer to the Masoretic text and became so popular that it replaced the original Septuagint version of Daniel, in all but two manuscripts of the Septuagint itself.[23][24][25] The Septuagint version appears to agree more with the Qumran fragments rather than the Hebrew/Aramaic Masoretic text reflected in modern translations.
A total of eight copies of the Book of Daniel have been found[27] at Qumran: two in Cave 1, five in Cave 4, and one in Cave 6. None are complete due to degradation, but between them, they preserve text from eleven of Daniel’s twelve chapters. The twelfth chapter is found in the Florilegium 4Q174. All eight manuscripts were copied within 175 years, ranging from 125 BCE (Masoretic Text, however none have the long form as preserved in the Septuagint. All eight scrolls do not reveal any major disagreements against the Masoretic Text, although James C. VanderKam observes that Hebrew, switches to Aramaic at 2:4b, then reverts back to Hebrew at 8:1.[20]
Linguistic criticism
Daniel’s twelve chapters may be divided into three notable sections as based on its linguistic structure:[28]
Part I: Chapter 1-2:3 introduces Daniel and his companions and the circumstances they were in. (Hebrew).
Part II: Chapter 2:4-7 are the Court tales of Daniel and his companions living amongst the Babylonians. (Aramaic).
Part III: Chapters 8-12 are Daniel’s prophetic visions of Israel’s future (Hebrew).
Aramaic portion
Scholars have speculated about the bilingual literary structure of Daniel - Chapters 2 through 7 in Aramaic, the rest in Hebrew. One of the most frequent speculations is that the entire book (excepting 9:4-20) was originally written in Aramaic, with portions translated into Hebrew, possibly to increase acceptance[29] - many Aramaisms in the Hebrew text find proposed explanation by the hypothesis of an inexact initial translation into Hebrew.
According to John J. Collins in his 1993 commentary, Daniel, Hermeneia Commentary, the Aramaic in Daniel is of a later form than that used in the Samaria correspondence, but slightly earlier than the form used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, meaning that the Aramaic chapters 2-6 may have been written earlier in the Hellenistic period than the rest of the book, with the vision in chapter 7 being the only Aramaic portion dating to the time of Antiochus. The Hebrew portion is, for all intents and purposes, identical to that found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, meaning chapters 1 and 8-12 were in existence before the late 2nd century BC.[30]
Contrary to the above, the Expositor's Bible Commentary (Zondervan, 1990) says that the language of Daniel, in comparison with the Hebrew and Aramaic texts of the Hellenistic period, "prove quite conclusively to any scholar that the second-century date and Palestinian provenance of the Book of Daniel cannot be upheld any longer without violence being done to the science of linguistics." It adds that the serious mistakes of the Septuagint to render many Persian and Accadian terms, as the offices mentioned in Dan. 3:3, proves ignorance of words of the old past, already forgotten in the Hellenistic period, indicating that the Book of Daniel was written in the late 6th century BC.[31]
E.C. Lucas is more cautious in his assessment of linguistic arguments as well. Evaluating Collins' approach, he considers "the wide geographical spread from which the material comes and the implicit assumption that linguistic developments would have occurred uniformly throughout this area" a weakness and concludes, "The character of the Hebrew and Aramaic could support a date in the fifth or fourth century for the extant written form of the book, but does not demand a second-century date." He agrees with Collins that there are "clear differences" between Qumran Hebrew and the Hebrew of Daniel.[32]
Greek loanwords
Three Greek musical terms occur in Daniel chapter 3. All three loanwords are the musical instruments: κιθαρις (cithara), ψαλτηριον (psaltery) and συμφωνια (symphonia). Frank Gaebelein observes that "Greek mercenaries and slaves served in the Babylonian and Assyrian periods, some of whom were undoubtedly versed in Greek music and musical instruments."[16] The earliest known use of the Greek word symphonia, dates back to Pythagoras, born in the 6th century BCE, who has used the term. The adjectival use of symphonia meaning, "in unison", is found in the Hymni Homerica, ad Mercurium 51; both instances date from the 6th century BCE.[18][19]
Persian loanwords
There are about 19 Persian loanwords that occur in the Aramaic portions of the Book of Daniel. The Persians used Aramaic in their administrative control of the empire. Accordingly, their own Persian language influenced Aramaic. Such influence has caused Aramaic to have many Persian loanwords that can be seen in later historical texts. Since Daniel was a statesman during the Persian conquests, the Book of Daniel could have been written in a period when the Persians had their greatest influence on Aramaic, believed to be in the mid 6th century BC.[12]
Use of Chaldean
The book of Daniel uses the term "Chaldean" to refer both to an ethnic group, and to astrologers in general. According to Montgomery and Hammer[citation needed] Daniel's use of the word 'Chaldean' to refer to astrologers in general is an anachronism, as during the Neo-Babylonian and early Persian periods (when Daniel is said to have lived), it referred only to an ethnicity.[citation needed] (Compare the later Chaldean Oracles).
Chiastic structure or concentric structure is a common feature of ancient Hebrew poetry and literature. Attempts have been made to organize the entire book of Daniel with a chiastic structure despite the major break between Daniel 6 and 7, even though there are parallel themes across that break. The central theme of Daniel 1-6 is God demonstrating that he is more powerful than the monarchs of Babylon and Persia. Daniel 7-12 focuses on God’s plan for the future in regard to the fate of world kingdoms being replaced by His kingdom. Across the entire book, each chapter forms a coherent unit, with a concluding unit of three final chapters (10-12).[33]
Aramaic chiastic form
In 1978, Joyce G. Baldwin, former principal of Trinity College, Bristol, proposed her view of the chiastic language structure for the Aramaic portion of Daniel chapters 2-7.[34]
A. Four empires and God's coming kingdom.(ch.2)
B. Trial by fire and God's deliverance.(ch.3)
C. A king warned, chastised and delivered.(ch.4)
C'. A king warned, defiant and deposed.(ch.5)
B'. Trial in the lions' den and God's deliverance.(ch.6)
A'. Four empires and God's everlasting kingdom.(ch.7)
Double-chiasm theory
A. Lenglet also proposed a chiastic language structure for the Aramaic portion of chapters 2 through 7 in 1972. Then in 1986, William H. Shea, Ph.D. in Archeology, expanded on Lenglet's foundation to include the entire book of Daniel. Shea proposed that Daniel is composed of a double chiasm.[35] He supports that the chiastic structure is emphasized by the languages in which the book is written. The first chiasm is written in Aramaic and the second in Hebrew which explains why Aramaic continues to be used in chapter 7 rather than ending in chapter 6. Those who follow the chiastic language structure, view chapter 7 as the end of the first half of the book.
Parallel themes share common label
The sections labeled A, A', A" and A"' are placed in parallel because they all have a similar theme: prophecies about successive kingdoms. God's people suffer trials in all 4 parts labelled B, B', B" and B"'. Sections C, C', C" and C"' deal with prophecies about the actions of different kings. Finally the structure portrays the trial faced by the Anointed One as the focal point of the book (D ).
Structure has precedence over chronology
The first 6 narrative chapters are fit into the structure rather than defining the structure. For instance, chapter 6 (B'), which ought to follow chapter 7 (A') chronologically, is put in parallel with chapter 3 (B) because they both deal with the persecution of Daniel and his friends i.e. "God's people." And chapter 5 (C') should follow chapters 7 and 8 (A"). Instead, it is put in parallel with chapter 4 (C) where divine judgements are pronounced against the Babylonian kings.
Grouping emphasizes prophecies
This chiastic grouping of chapters having the same theme has implications when it comes to the chapters containing prophecies (A, A', A", A'"). Not only are they parallel because they contain prophecies, but the prophecies themselves are parallel to each other, which has been recognized for millennia. Christian commentators have not always identified the same kingdoms in each chapter though. Chapters 2 and 7 have generally - though not exclusively[36] - been interpreted as extending to Roman times. Chapters 8 and 11 have been applied to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes.[37] Historicists interpret all four prophecies as extending from Daniel's time, past the present to a future Kingdom of God.[38]
Others like Walton have advocated a combination of both schemes, but in different parts of Daniel.[39]
The first chapter, written in Hebrew Masoretic text, introduces Daniel and his three companions: Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah. These four young Hebrew men were taken captive in one of the Babylonian raids against Judah in 605 BC. They were placed in special training as court servants to King Nebuchadnezzar. Their names and diets were changed to reflect Babylonian culture in an attempt to take away their Jewish identities.[28] However, Daniel was able to convince the King to allow for a vegetarian diet.[1:11-16]
Nebuchadnezzar's dream: the composite statue (France, 15th century).
The king has a disturbing dream and asks his wise men to interpret it, but refuses to divulge its content. When they protest he sentences all of them, including Daniel and his friends, to death. Daniel intervenes and asks for a temporary stay of execution so that he can petition his God for a solution. He receives an explanatory vision in the night, and then relays the content and meaning of the king's dream the following day. Nebuchadnezzar has dreamed of an enormous idol made of four metals, with feet of mixed iron and clay. The image is completely destroyed by a rock that turns into a huge mountain, filling the whole earth. The idol's composition of metals is interpreted as a series of successive kingdoms, starting with Nebuchadnezzar. Finally all of these dominions are crushed by God's kingdom, a kingdom that will "endure forever".
Daniel's companions Ananias (Hananiah/Shadrach), Azariah (Abednego), and Mishael (Meshach) refuse to bow to the emperor's golden statue and are thrown into a furnace. As seen by Nebuchadnezzar, a fourth figure appears in the furnace with the three and God is credited for preserving them from the flames.
Madness of Nebuchadnezzar
Nebuchadnezzar's dream: the cut down tree (France, 15th century).
Nebuchadnezzar recounts a dream of a huge tree which is suddenly cut down at the command of a heavenly messenger. Daniel is summoned and interprets the dream as referring to Nebuchadnezzar, who for seven years will lose his power and mind and become like a wild animal. All of this comes to pass until, at the end of the seven years, Nebuchadnezzar acknowledges that "heaven rules" and his kingdom and sanity are restored. The recurring image of a tree representing a kingdom appears at least three times in the Bible.
Belshazzar and his nobles blasphemously drink from sacred Jewish temple vessels, offering praise to inanimate gods, until a hand mysteriously appears before the crowd and writes upon the wall of the palace. The horrified king eventually summons Daniel who is able to read the writing and offer the following interpretation: Mene, Mene - God has numbered the days of your reign and brought it to an end. Tekel - You have been weighed on the scales and found wanting. Upharsin - Your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians. "That very night", we are informed, Belshazzar was slain and "Darius the Mede" took over the kingdom.
Daniel is elevated to a pre-eminent position under Darius which elicits the jealousy of other officials. Knowing of Daniel's devotion to his God, these officials trick the king into issuing an edict forbidding worship of any other god or man for a 30 day period. Because Daniel continues to pray three times a day to God towards Jerusalem, he is accused and king Darius, forced by his own decree, throws Daniel into the lions' den. God shuts up the mouths of the lions and the next morning king Darius finds Daniel unharmed and casts his accusers and their families into the lions' pit where they are instantly devoured.
Daniel's visions
Chapters 7-12 contain four visions of Daniel that parallel Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Chapter 2 where the fate of four great empires meet their downfall and are replaced by God’s kingdom. The first three chapters have three apocalyptic visions while the last three chapters give one extended apocalypse, in full detail, pertaining to events that surround the Maccabean revolt. For each of his dreams, Daniel is in need of an angelic interpreter and the force of each revelation impacts him severely.[40]
The vision in the first year of Belshazzar the king of Babylon (7:1) concerning four great beasts (7:3) representing four future kings (7:17) or kingdoms (7:23), the fourth of which devours the whole earth, treading it down and crushing it (7:23). This fourth beast has ten horns representing ten kings. They are followed by a further wicked king, or "little horn", who subdues three of the ten (7:24), speaks against the Most High, wages war against the saints, and attempts to change the set times and laws (7:25); after 'a time and times and half a time', this king is judged and stripped of his kingdom by an "Ancient of Days" and his heavenly court (7:26); next, "one like a son of man" approaches the Ancient of Days and is invested with worldwide dominion; moreover, his everlasting reign over all kings and kingdoms is shared with "the people of the Most High" (7:27)
The vision in the third year of Belshazzar concerning a ram and a male goat (8:1-27) which, we are informed, represent Medea, Persia (the ram's two horns), and Greece (the goat). The goat with a mighty horn becomes very powerful until the horn breaks off to be replaced by four "lesser" horns. The vision focuses on a wicked king who arises to challenge the "army of the Lord" by removing the daily temple sacrifice and desecrating the sanctuary for a period of "twenty three hundred evening/mornings".
The vision in first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus (9:1) concerning seventy weeks, or seventy "sevens", apportioned for the history of the Israelites and of Jerusalem (9:24) This consists of a meditation on the prediction in Jeremiah that the desolation of Jerusalem would last seventy years, a lengthy prayer by Daniel in which he pleads for God to restore Jerusalem and its temple, and an angelic explanation which focuses on a longer time period - "seventy sevens" - and a future restoration and destruction of city and temple by a coming ruler.
Daniel has a lengthy vision (10:1 - 12:13) in the third year of Cyrus king of Persia, around 536 BCE, regarding conflicts between the "King of the North" and the "King of the South" (= Egypt, 11:8). An angel appears to Daniel and explains that the demonic "prince of Persia" is in opposition, but that Michael "the great prince of Israel" will save them, as the only one who will "stand up."(10:21; 12:1) The vision is for "the final part of the days."(10:13,14) Starting with references to Persia and Greece it, again, culminates in the description of an arrogant king who desecrates the temple, sets up a "desolating abomination", removes the daily sacrifice, and persecutes those who remain true to the "holy covenant".
The visions of Daniel, with those of 1 Enoch, Isaiah, Jubilees, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, are the inspiration for much of the apocalyptic ideology and symbolism of the Qumran community's Dead Sea scrolls and the early literature of Christianity.[41]
Daniel 1:1 - "In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnez'zar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it." (King James Version)
According to the Babylonian Chronicles, published by Donald Wiseman in 1956, it was established that Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem the first time on 2 Adar (16 March) 597 BC.[42] Before Wiseman's publication, Thiele had determined from the biblical texts that Nebuchadnezzar's initial capture of Jerusalem occurred in the spring of 597 BC,[43] while other scholars, including Albright, more frequently dated the event to 598 BC.[44]
Three Aramaic Dead Sea Scrolls fragments known as The Prayer of Nabonidus (4QPrNab, sometimes given as 4QOrNab) seem to parallel the insanity suffered by Nebuchadnezzar as described in Daniel Chapter 4.
The fragments describe a Babylonian king (spelled N-b-n-y) who is afflicted by God with an "evil disease" for a period of seven years; he is cured and his sins forgiven after the intervention of a Jewish exile who is described as a "diviner"; he issues a written proclamation in praise of the Most High God, and speaks in the first person.
These tiny fragments turned up in a collection of Dead Sea Scrolls possessed by the Jordanian Government, and were first published by Milik in 1956. Long before this, scholars had speculated that Nabonidus' exile in Teima lay behind the story of Nebuchadnezzar's banishment and madness in Daniel chapter four.[45]
There are also a number of differences between The Prayer of Nabonidus and the account of Nebuchadnezzar's madness:
Different kings are involved in the two accounts
Nebuchadnezzar's "affliction" was of the mind whereas Nabonidus' seems to have been a skin disease.
According to one possible translation, the exorcist or diviner heals Nabonidus and pardons his sins, whereas in Daniel Nebuchadnezzar is cured when he "[lifts] up [his] eyes to heaven" and "[acknowledges] that the Most High is sovereign". (An alternative reading with sound support, however, attributes the healing and forgiveness of Nabonidus' sins to God [46] )
Nebuchadnezzar's illness occurs in Babylon; Nabonidus is stricken in Tema. (The end result, though, is that both kings are absent from Babylon for the duration of their illnesses, since Nebuchadnezzar is "driven away from mankind." (4:33, NASB))
Some of the words and phrases of the prayer have to be inferred from the context because the text is fragmentary. [Archer, Gleason L. "Daniel", Expositor's. Vol. 7 (Zondervan, 1985): 15; he cites Harrison, R. K. Introduction to the Old Testament. (Tyndale, 1969): 1118-9]
The "general consensus" of scholars is that Daniel four ultimately draws upon the traditions and legends of Nabonidus.[4] While others feel that the Prayer of Nabonidus shows signs of dependence on the book of Daniel.[47][48] Matthias Henze even suggests that the narrative of Nebuchadnezzar's madness draws on the Mesopotamian epic of Gilgamesh. He argues that the author of Daniel uses elements from the description of the wild man Enkidu, who roams the steppe with the animals.[49]
It is also possible that a reference to the insanity of Nebuchadnezzar is to be found in the cuneiform text: BM 34113.[50][51]
New evidence from Babylon has verified the existence of Belshazzar, the name first given in Daniel 5:1, as well as his co-regency during the absence of his father, Nabonidus, in Temâ. However, there is no evidence that Belshazzar ever officially held the title of "king" as he is never called such on the Nabonidus Cylinder. On that cylinder, Nabonidus petitions the god Sin as follows:
"And as for Belshazzar my firstborn son, my own child, let the fear of your great divinity be in his heart, and may he commit no sin; may he enjoy happiness in life". In addition, The Verse Account of Nabonidus (British Museum tablet 38299) states, "[Nabonidus] entrusted the army (?) to his oldest son, his first born, the troops in the country he ordered under his command. He let everything go, entrusted the kingship (Akk. šarrûtu) to him, and, himself, he started out for a long journey. The military forces of Akkad marching with him, he turned to Temâ deep in the west" (Col. II, lines 18 - 29. 18).
In line with the statement that Nabonidus "entrusted the kingship" to Belshazzar in his absence, there is evidence that Belshazzar's name was used with his father's in oath formulas, that he was able to pass edicts, lease farmlands, and receive the "royal privilege" to eat the food offered to the gods.
The conqueror of Babylon was Gobryas, governor of Gutium, a general of Cyrus, king of Persia. No such person as Darius the Mede[5:31] is known in history. The successor of Cyrus as king of Persia was named Darius. The author of Daniel inherited a schema of four kingdoms in which Media preceded Persia. John J. Collins suggests that it is highly probable that Daniel created the figure of Darius the Mede to fit this schema.[52]
George R. Law, Ph.D., provides this list of candidates, who may identify with Darius the Mede:[53]
Similar to the traditional view in Judaism,[54] conservative Christians[who?] view the Book of Daniel as written by the statesman of the same name, Daniel. Among conservatives,[who?] they claim that Daniel wrote the book around 536 BC after having been in captivity for about 70 years.[5] Unlike many Judaists, conservative Christians[who?] consider Daniel’s visions as prophetic. Conservative interpretations[by whom?] hold that Daniel predicted the empires of Babylonia and Persia to be succeeded by the Greeks under Alexander the Great. Daniel also foresees the Greek Empire being divided among the four generals upon the death of Alexander. Daniel then predicts that the Jewish people would suffer great persecution under an official who would come to power after Alexander’s death. Many interpreters identify this ruler as Antiochus Epiphanes, the Greek ruler of Syria. In history, Antiochus persecuted the Jews unmercifully from 176-164 BC,[5] which led to the Maccabean revolt of 167 BC.[55]
In the Book of Matthew 24:15, of the New Testament, Jesus gives attestation to Daniel, "When, therefore, you see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand)". In the Hebrew portion of Daniel chapters 8-12, Daniel speaks of this abomination of desolation in the last two chapters. However, this does not clarify who wrote the Aramaic portions of chapters 2-7.[54]
The "Song of the Three Holy Youths" is part of the Matins service in Eastern Orthodoxy, and of Lauds on Sundays and feast days in Catholicism.
The various episodes in the first half of the book are used by Christians as moral stories, and are often believed to foreshadow events in the gospels.
The apocalyptic section is important to Christians for the image of the "one like a son of Man" (Dan. 7:13),[56] and Jesus is presented using the same wording in the Book of Revelation in 1:13-15.[57] The connection with Daniel's vision (as opposed to the usage in the Book of Ezekiel) is made explicit in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark (Matt. 26:64; Mark 14:62).[58] According to the gospels, Jesus used the title "Son of Man" as his preferred name for himself (Matt. 26:64; Mark 14:62). Christians sometimes see this as a claim by Jesus that he is the Messiah. According to the New American Bible and some Christian theologians, "one like a son of man" represents "the saints of the Most High" as interpreted in the vision later (Dan 7:16-18, 21-22, 25-27) and Jesus made the title "Son of Man" a distinguishing self reference.[59][60][61] Later Jewish interpreters interpreted this figure as the Jewish Messiah. Such interpretation appears in the Similitudes of Enoch and 4 Ezra.[62][63]
In the Olivet discourse (Mark 13:14, Matt. 24:15) Jesus applies Daniel's prophecy of a desolating sacrilege set up in the temple (Dan. 9:27, 11:31) to a future event—the CE 70 destruction of Jerusalem.[64][65] According to Jesus' words, this event would involve the leveling of the temple, flight from Judea, and would happen in Jesus' own generation (Mark 13: 2-4, 14, 30). Many Christians today re-apply this prediction to a final tribulation immediately preceding Judgement Day. Some consider the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks to be particularly compelling due to what they interpret to be prophetic accuracy.
According to some scholars, Dan. 12:2 is the earliest clear reference in the Hebrew Scriptures to the resurrection of the dead,[66] with many "countrymen" awakening from death, some to eternal life and some to eternal disgrace. This belief is also expressed in 2 Maccabees and is linked, as in Daniel, with the idea of divine retribution.[67][68]
^ abcdHarrison, general editor, Ronald F. Youngblood ; consulting editors, F.F. Bruce, R.K. (1995). Nelson's new illustrated Bible dictionary. Nashville: T. Nelson. p. 328. ISBN 0840720718.
^ Dillard and Longman, An Introduction to the Old Testament, Apollos 1995, pp. 329-350.
^Miller, Stephen R. (1994). Daniel (null ed.). Nashville, Tenn.: Broadman & Holman. p. 94. ISBN 9780805401189.
^Redditt, Paul L. (1999). Daniel: based on the New Revised Standard Version. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. p. 102. ISBN 9781841270098.
^eds, Tremper Longman III & David E. Garland, general (2009). Daniel-Malachi (Rev. ed. ed.). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan. p. 115. ISBN 9780310268932.
^ abRoche, Paul (2001). The Bible's greatest stories. New York: New American Library. p. 342. ISBN 9780451528216.
^Lella, a new translation with notes and commentary on chapters 1-9 by Louis F. Hartman. Introd., and commentary on chapters 10-12 by Alexander Di Lella (1983). The Book of Daniel (1. ed. 3. print. ed.). New York [u.a.]: Doubleday. p. 197. ISBN 9780385013222.
^ "There is no possibility that the text of Daniel could have been composed as late as the Maccabean uprising, and that there is every likelihood that the Aramaic comes from the same period, if not a century earlier, than the Aramaic of the Elephantine Papyri and of Ezra, which are admittedly fifth-century productions. It goes without saying that if the predictions concerning the period of Antiochus III and Antiochus IV (222-164 BC) are composed in language antedating the second-century and third-century B.C., then the whole effort to explain Daniel as a vaticinium ex eventu must be abandoned."
^ E.C. Lucas, Daniel (Apollos OT Commentary; Apollos, 2002) p. 307.
^editor, J. Daniel Hays ; Tremper Longman III, general (2010). Message of the prophets : a survey of the prophetic and apocalyptic books of the Old Testament. [Grand Rapids, Mich.]: Zondervan. p. 236. ISBN 9780310271529.
^Ford 1978 Ford speaks of 'the almost universal application of [the little horn symbol of chapter 8] to Antiochus Epiphanes'. He also quotes the pre-critical and post-counter reformation view of the Anglican Bishop Thomas Newton in his "Dissertation on the Prophecies..." originally published in the mid 1700s (JF Dove,1838, p247): 'This little horn [of Daniel 8] is by the generality of interpreters, both Jewish and Christian, ancient and modern, supposed to mean Antiochus Epiphanes.' Newton adds that 'most of the ancient fathers and modern divines and commentators' agree with Jerome in identifying Antiochus in chapter 8, while also allowing that "Antiochus Epiphan es was a type of Antichrist".
^ Eisenman (1997), p. 19f. "Daniel's clear association with the Maccabean Uprising and those against Rome are a possible factor in the eventual downgrading of it, to include a redefinition of the role of prophet, keeping in mind that at roughly this time the Hebrew canon was being evaluated and adopted."
^ D. J. Wiseman, Chronicles of Chaldean Kings in the British Museum (London: Trustees of the British Museum, 1956) 73.
^ Edwin Thiele, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, (1st ed.; New York: Macmillan, 1951; 2d ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965; 3rd ed.; Grand Rapids: Zondervan/Kregel, 1983). ISBN 0-8254-3825-X, 9780825438257, 217.
^ Kenneth Strand, "Thiele's Biblical Chronology As a Corrective for Extrabiblical Dates," Andrews University Seminary Studies 34 (1996) 310, 317.
^ Peter W. Flint, The Daniel Tradition at Qumran, in Collins et al. (2002), p.336.
^Steinmann, A. (December 2002). "The Chicken and the Egg: A New Proposal for the Relationship between the "Prayer of Nabonidus" and the "Book of Daniel"". Revue de Qumran20 (4): 557–570.
^Collins, John J. (1998). The apocalyptic i magination : an introduction to Jewish apocalyptic literature (2. ed. ed.). Grand Rapids, Mich. [u.a.]: Eerdmans. p. 86. ISBN 0802843719.
^Law, George R. (2010). Identification of Darius the Mede. North Carolina: Ready Scribe Press. p. x. ISBN 9780982763100.
^ 2 Macc. 7:14 : "And when he was now ready to die, he spoke thus: It is better, being put to death by men, to look for hope from God, to be raised up again by him; for, as to thee (Antiochus Epiphanes), thou shalt have no resurrection unto life".
References
Baldwin, Joyce G. (1981). Donald J. Wiseman. ed. Daniel: an introduction and commentary. Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press. ISBN 978-0877842736.
Casey, Maurice (1980). Son of Man: The interpretation and influence of Daniel 7. Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. p. 272. ISBN 0281036977. "lists ten commentators of the 'Syrian Tradition' who identify the fourth beast of chapter 7 as Greece, the little horn as Antiochus, and - in the majority of instances - the "saints of the Most High" as Maccabean Jews."
Collins, John Joseph (1994). Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Hermeneia: a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible). Augsburg Fortress Publishers. p. 499. ISBN 0800660404.
Dougherty, Raymond Philip (1929). Nabonidus and Belshazzar: A Study of the Closing Events of the Neo- Babylonian Empire. Yale University Press. p. 216. ISBN B000M9MGX8.
Easton's Bible dictionary
Eisenman, Robert (1998). James, the brother of Jesus : the key to unlocking the secrets of early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls. New York: Penguin Books. ISBN 0-14-025773-X.
Ford, Desmond (1978). Daniel. Southern Publishing Association. p. 309. ISBN 0812701747.
Godwin, compiled and translated by Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie ; with additional translations by Thomas Taylor and Arthur Fairbanks, Jr. ; introduced and edited by David R. Fideler ; with a foreword by Joscelyn (1987). The Pythagorean sourcebook and library : an anthology of ancient writings which relate to Pythagoras and Pythagorean philosophy ([New ed.] ed.). Grand Rapids: Phanes Press. ISBN 9780933999510.
Louis F. Hartman and Alexander A. Di Lella, "Daniel", in Raymond E. Brown et al., ed., The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, 1990, pp. 406–20.
Hoppe, Leslie J. (1992). "Deuteronomy". In Bergant, Dianne (Google On-line Books). The Collegeville Bible commentary: based on the New American Bible: Old Testament. Liturgical Press. p. 464. ISBN 0814622119. http://books.google.com/?id=Nj-AkOJ9wRQC&pg=PA560. Retrieved 2010-06-24.
Keil, C. F.; Delitzsch, Franz (2006) [1955]. Ezekiel and Daniel. Commentary on the Old Testament. 9. Hendrickson Publishers. ISBN 0913573884.
Lucas, Ernest (2002). Daniel. Leicester, England: Apollos. ISBN 0-85111-780-5.
Notes (1992). The New American Bible. Catholic Book Publishing Co.. p. 1021. ISBN 9780899425108.
Oppenheim, A. Leo (1966). "Babylonian and Assyrian Historical Texts". In James B. Pritchard. Ancient Near Eastern Texts (2nd ed.; 3rd print ed.). Princeton University Press. p. 308.
Rowley, H. H. (1959). Darius the Mede and the Four World Empires in the Book of Daniel: A Historical Study of Contemporary Theories. University of Wales Press. p. 195. ISBN 159752896X. ISSN159752896X.
Rowley, Harold Henry (1963). The Growth of the Old Testament. Harper & Row.
Shea, William H. (1986). "The Prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27". In Holbrook, Frank. The Seventy Weeks, Leviticus, and the Nature of Prophecy. Daniel and Revelation Committee Series. 3. Review and Herald Publishing Association.
Steinberg, Martin H. Manser ; associate editors, David Barratt, Pieter J. Lalleman, Julius Steinberg (2009). Critical companion to the Bible : a literary reference. New York: Facts On File. ISBN 9780816070657.
VanderKam, James; Flint, Peter (2002). The meaning of the Dead Sea scrolls: their significance for understanding the Bible, Judaism, Jesus, and Christianity (1st paperback ed. ed.). London: T&T Clark. pp. 137–8. ISBN 9780567084682.
Wiseman, D. J. (1965). Notes on Some Problems in the Book of Daniel. London: Tyndale Press. p. 80. ISBN 085111038X.
Wilson, Robert Dick (1917). Studies In The Book Of Daniel: A Discussion Of The Historical Questions. G. P. Putnam's Sons. p. 408. ISBN 143726462X.
Gaston, T. E. (2009). Historical Issues in the Book of Daniel. TAANATHSHILOH. p. 178. ISBN 095615400X.
Further reading
Academic
Collins, edited by John J.; VanEpps, Peter W. Flint ; with the assistance of Cameron (2002). The book of Daniel : composition and reception ([Reprint] ed.). Boston: Brill Academic Publishers. ISBN 0-391-04127-4.
DiTommaso, Lorenzo (2005). The Book of Daniel and the apocryphal Daniel literature ([Online-Ausg.] ed.). Leiden [u.a.]: Brill Academic Publishers. ISBN 9004144129.
Woude, edited by A.S. van der (1993). The book of Daniel in the light of new findings. Leuven: Leuven University Press. ISBN 906831467X.
Ford, Desmond (1978). Daniel. Southern Publishing Association. p. 309. ISBN 0812701747.
Holbrook, Frank B., ed (1986). Symposium on Daniel. Daniel & Revelation Committee Series. 2. Biblical Research Institute: Review and Herald Publishing Association. p. 557. ISBN 0925675016.
Book of Daniel — Book of Daniel † Catholic Encyclopedia ► Book of Daniel In the Hebrew Bible, and in most recent Protestant (Protestantism) versions, the Book of Daniel is limited to its proto canonical portions. In the Septuagint, the Vulgate, and… … Catholic encyclopedia
Book of Daniel (disambiguation) — The Book of Daniel is a book of the Hebrew Bible.Book of Daniel can also refer to:* The Book of Daniel (novel), a 1971 novel by E. L. Doctorow, loosely based on the case of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. * The Book of Daniel (TV series), a 2006 show … Wikipedia
Book of Daniel — noun an Old Testament book that tells of the apocalyptic visions and the experiences of Daniel in the court of Nebuchadnezzar • Syn: ↑Daniel, ↑Book of the Prophet Daniel • Instance Hypernyms: ↑book • Part Holonyms: ↑Hagiographa, ↑Ketubim, ↑ … Useful english dictionary
The Book of Daniel (serie televisee) — The Book of Daniel (série télévisée) The Book of Daniel Titre original The Book of Daniel Genre Série tragi comique Créateur(s) Jack Kenny Pays d’origine États Unis Chaîne d’ori … Wikipédia en Français
The Book of Daniel (série télévisée) — Pour les articles homonymes, voir The Book of Daniel. The Book of Daniel Titre original The Book of Daniel Genre Série tragi comique Créateur(s) Jack Kenny Pays d’origine … Wikipédia en Français
The book of daniel (série télévisée) — The Book of Daniel Titre original The Book of Daniel Genre Série tragi comique Créateur(s) Jack Kenny Pays d’origine États Unis Chaîne d’ori … Wikipédia en Français
The Book of Daniel (TV series) — The Book of Daniel Format Drama Written by Jack Kenny Starring Aidan Quinn Susanna Thompson Christian Campbell Alison Pill Ivan Shaw Ellen Burstyn … Wikipedia
The Book of Daniel (novel) — The Book of Daniel (1971) is semi historical novel by E. L. Doctorow, loosely based on the trial and execution of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. Doctorow tells the story of Paul Rochelle Isaacson (the Rosenbergs) through the person of their older… … Wikipedia
The book of daniel — Cette page d’homonymie répertorie les différents sujets et articles partageant un même nom. The Book of Daniel, film de 1983, The Book of Daniel, série télévisée de 2006. Ce document provient de « The Book of Daniel ». Catégorie : Homonymie … Wikipédia en Français
The Book of Daniel — Cette page d’homonymie répertorie les différentes œuvres portant le même titre. The Book of Daniel est un film de 1983. The Book of Daniel est un roman de 1971. The Book of Daniel est une série télévisée de 2006. Voir aussi Livre de Daniel… … Wikipédia en Français
