NOTES ON DANIEL

INTRODUCTION

     In Daniel 1:8 it is stated:  "But Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself  with the portion of  the kings's meat [which had been sacrificed to idols], nor drink the wine [also probably offered to idols and was fermented] he drank; therefore he requested of  the prince of  the eunuches that he might not defile himself."

     This verse declares his separation from the worldly situation in which he found himself and sets forth the spiritual theme of  this book.  As this writer begins this study of  Daniel, some introductory matters need to be examined.  One of  main sources is Walvoord, John F., Daniel, The Key to Prophetic Revelation. Chicago:  Moody Press, c1971 (identified simply by Walvoord, page number; also Ibid. will be used in citing the same page as previously cited).  Many statements are from his work though not directly quoted.  All other references will be identified as used.  This writer will also use op. cit. when referring to the previous work, but a different page number.  In some cases an author will be referred to when giving the gist of  his comments; in that case the work and page numbers will be referenced in so far as is possible.  This writer's comments within a quotation will be in brackets ([ ]) unless otherwise indicated.

I. DATE AND AUTHORSHIP
     A. The Date
          1. The book covers
               a. First conquest of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar--605 B. C.
               b. Third year of  Cyrus--536 B. C.
               c. Daniel may have lived about another six years.
          2. The traditional date for the book
               a. Sixth century B. C.
               b. It may have been written in part during Daniel's lifetime.
               c. Certainly finished before his death--c. 530 B. C.
          3. "So-called" Higher Criticism
               a. First questioned by a neo-platonist pagan, Porphyry, Third Century A. D.
                    (I) He denied the Daniel authorship of  the book.
                    (II) He stated it was a forgery of  the Second Century B. C.
               b. No questioning of  it again until the rise of  higher critics of  the seventeenth century.
                    (I) Note that the overall view against this criticism
                         (A) Was of  anti-Christian origin
                         (B) Had presented no new facts to make for any change in the position of  the church.
                         (C) Support of  Porphyry's theory was part of  an overall approach to the Scriptures--denial of  any
                              traditional authorships.
                         (D) Thus, the attack on the Daniel authorship was actually an attack on the Bible as a whole--Cf. Genesis
                              3:1--"Yea, hath God said . . .?"
                  (II) It should be noted that the date and the authorship go hand-in-hand; therefore, the balance of  this case will
                       be discussed in connection with the authorship.
                  (III) The date proposed by the critics is c165 B.C.
     B. The Author
          1. The book of  Daniel itself
               a. Most people, both liberal and conservative, consider the book as a unit.
               b. Daniel is mentioned throughout the book.
                    (I) He was a participant and eye-witness of  the events.
                    (II) Mentioned in the third person to chapter 7
                         (A) John in his gospel never referred to himself in the first person.
                         (B) Most formal writings today, such as Master's theses or doctorate dissertations are written in third
                              person.
                         (C) This writer has repeatedly referred to himself  in the third person in presentation of  truth.
                    (III) In any event Daniel does refer to himself in the first person after chapter six.
               c. Daniel's character (Cf. J. Vernon McGee, Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee.  Nashville:  Thomas
                    Nelson Publishers, c1982; III:525; italics are his.)
                    (I) A "man of  purpose (Dan. 1:8; 6:10)"
                    (II) A "man of  prayer (Dan. 2:17-23; 6:10; 9:3-19; 10)"
                    (III) A "man of  prophecy" (the last half of  Daniel)
          2. The mention of  Daniel by Ezekiel
               a. This does not, of  course, guarantee that Daniel wrote the book of  Daniel.
               b. It does show that he lived during the same time as Ezekiel.
                    (I) The passages themselves
                         (A) Ezekiel 14:14
                         (B) Ezekiel 14:20
                         (C) Ezekiel 28:3
                    (II) It is evident that this Daniel was as well known as Noah and Job.
                    (III) Ezekiel's references are generally ignored by the critics.
                         (A) If  mentioned, they disregard them.
                         (B) Montgomery (Montgomery, James A., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of
                              Daniel.  The International Critical Commentary.  Edinburgh:  T. & T. Clark, 1964; all references
                              and quotes are from Walvoord's work.) refers this Daniel in Ezekiel to some traditional saint of  about
                              1400 B. C.
                         (C) Some clay tablets discovered in 1930 speak of  a certain Aghat, father of  a Daniel who was unusually
                              wise and righteous.
                  (D) However this so-called Daniel was a pagan worshipper and curser of  his enemies; hardly a fitting
                       character of  a godly man, let alone equal to Noah and Job.
          3. The authenticity of  Daniel by Christ
               a. The Scriptures
                    (I) Matthew 24:15
                    (II) Mark 13:14
               b. It is clear from these passages that Jesus Christ held Daniel as a prophet, quoting him with approval--
                    Compare Matthew 24:15 and 21 with Daniel 12:1; and Matthew 24:30 with Daniel 7:13.
               c. Liberals, of  course, discount this evidence by our Lord.
          4. The Qumran manuscripts--discovered in this century--tend to show that Daniel predates the Maccabean period
               of  the Second Century.
               a. Psalms and 1 and 2 Chronicles were placed at this same time by the critics.
               b. These manuscripts show that Psalms and 1 and 2 Chronicles were of  an earlier time.
               c. These manuscripts of  Daniel were all copies which would make the original at least a half century earlier.
               d. Liberals and critics in general, though ready to concede that the Psalms and 1 and 2 Chronicles were earlier,
                    are reluctant to do so with Daniel (probably because they would have to acknowledge the prophetic elements
                    of  the book).
          5. The critics objections to the early date, and consequent authorship of  Daniel, are basically six in number.
               a. Reject its canonicity
                    (I) They argue that its place in the Writings--the third division of  the Hebrew Scriptures--rather than in the
                         prophetic division shows that it was written after the close of  the second division, supposedly between
                         300 and 200 B. C. (This shows the desperation of  these critics.)
                    (II) Though prophetic in nature, Daniel was not a prophet in the sense that the major prophets (or minor
                         prophets, for that matter) were, but was a governmental official.
                    (III) It is probable that his writings were not distributed till after his death.
                    (IV) The Writings--the third division--were not so classified because of  a late date, but rather because of  the
                         class of  material in them.
                    (V) The Writings were considered to be inspired as much as the Pentateuch and the Prophets.
               b. Reject its prophetic elements
                    (I) The critics deny the possibility of  prophecy in the sense of  foretelling.
                    (II) This rejection is due to a denial of  a divine revelation.
                    (III) It is apocalyptic and thus--in their minds--unworthy of  consideration as prophecy.
                    (IV) It should be noted that along with the visions, etc., is divine interpretation.
                    (V) The existence of  spurious prophetic writings does not argue against the genuine ones.
                         (A) The very opposite is true; the spurious shows the existence of  the real.
                         (B) Counterfeiters do not counterfeit the spurious, but the genuine.
                    (VI) The real critics' problem is not that the prophecies are obscure, but rather they object to the clear
                         prophetic statements.
               c. Reject its miracles
                    (I) Again, this is really an attack on the Bible as a whole, for it is a book of  miracles.
                    (II) Their objection shows their naturalistic viewpoint.
                    (III) Really, there are only two miracles in this book.
                         (A) The deliverance of  the three in the fiery furnace
                         (B) The deliverance of  Daniel in the lions' den
               d. Raise textual problems
                    (I) They find numerous problems in the text.
                    (II) Yet they disagree among themselves as to the problems, which shows the subjective nature of  their
                         criticism.
                    (III) Criticism centers primarily in the Aramaic portions of  Daniel.
                         (A) Find many redactions, that is, editing of  the text.
                         (B) Find various tampering with the text.
                         (C) This matter of  redactions and tampering is highly subjective.
                         (D) There is no reason that Daniel could not have written these portions in Aramaic originally or in Hebrew
                              with a translation to the Aramaic.
                         (E) The grammar and vocabulary of  the Aramaic was that of  the 9th - 7th B. C,
               e. Raise language problems
                    (I) They object to certain non-Hebrew words.
                         (A) Greek
                         (B) Persian
                         (C) Used to prove late date of  this book
                    (II) The use of  Greek words are quite possible.
                         (A) Greek mercenaries (soldiers who hired themselves out to another country) were in the Assyrian army
                              as early as 653 B. C.
                         (B) Daniel was an official in Babylon and may have come in contact with Greek emissaries.
                         (C) If  the late date were so, Greek words would be more numerous.
                    (III) The use of  Persian words are a certainty.
                         (A) Remember, Daniel lived in the early part of  the Medeo-Persian empire.
                         (B) Regardless of  the location in this book, if  Daniel wrote it toward the end of  his life, Persian words
                              would then be natural.
               f. Raise historical inaccuracies
                    (I) The intimate knowledge of  events in the Sixth Century precludes such an objection.
                    (II) The supposed contradiction in 1:1 will be dealt with there.
                    (III) The identity of  Belshazzar--Chapter 5--has largely been cleared up by the Nabonidus Chronicles.
                    (IV) The identity of  Darius the Mede
                         (A) Critics argument is only from silence.
                         (B) Other explanations are equally plausible.
                    (V) In general, no critical theory is based in fact, but generally in circular reasoning.

II. PLACE AND PURPOSE
     A. Its Place in Scripture
          1. English Bible
               a. It is the last of  the Major Prophets
               b. This follows the tradition of  the
                    (I) Septuagint
                    (II) Latin Vulgate
                    (III) Martin Luther's translation
               c. Also follows Josephus, the great Jewish historian, who placed it with the other prophets.
          2. Hebrew Bible
               a. Has three divisions
                    (I) The Law
                         (A) Genesis
                         (B) Exodus
                         (C) Leviticus
                         (D) Numbers
                         (E) Deuteronomy
                    (II) The Prophets
                         (A) The major prophets--excluding Daniel
                         (B) The minor prophets
                    (III) The Writings
                         (A) Job
                         (B) Psalms
                         (C) Proverbs
                         (D) Ecclesiates
                         (E) Song of  Solomon (or The Canticles)
                         (F) The historical books including Ruth
                         (G) Ezra
                         (H) Nehemiah
                         (I) Esther
                         (J) Daniel, of  course
               b. The writings were considered by the Jews to be of  equal authority with the Law and the Prophets.
               c. The reason why Daniel was in the Writings
                   (I) It was not because it was inferior.
                   (II) Daniel was not called a prophet.
                   (III) Rather, he was
                        (A) A government official
                        (B) A wise man
                        (C) A seer
      B. Its Purpose
          1. Negatively
               a. Daniel's life
                    (I) Details lacking
                         (A) Age
                         (B) Lineage except he was of the tribe of  Judah (1:6)
                         (C) Death
                         (D) Marriage and/or children
                    (II) Only incidental matters of  his life are touched on.
               b. Israel's history
                    (I) Little or nothing said
                         (A) Except Daniel 1:1, 2
                         (B) The fact that they were in captivity (Cf. Daniel 9:2)
                    (II) Condition of  Jews in Babylon
          2. Positively
               a. Shows God's working even in captivity
               b. Gives God's prophetic program for Israel
               c. Offers hope to Jews in the future, particularly during the Maccabean period.

III. CHARACTER AND INTERPRETATION
     A. Its Character
          1. An apocalyptic book
               a. Term defined
                    (I) The word apocalyptic is from the Greek word APOKALYPSIS.
                    (II) The Greek word means an unveiling, particularly of  truth which would be concealed if  not revealed.
                    (III) Alexander defined such literature as "Apocalyptic literature is symbolic visionary prophetic literature
                         composed during oppressive conditions, consisting of  visions whose events are recorded exactly as they
                         were seen by the author and explained through a divine interpreter, and whose theological [pertaining to
                         the nature of  God] content is primarily eschatological [pertaining to last things]." (Alexander, Ralph,
                         Abstract of  "Hermeneutics of  Old Testament Apocalyptic Literature."  Doctor's dissertation, Dallas
                         Theological Seminary, 1968, page 1; quoted by Walvoord, John F., Daniel, The Key to Prophetic
                         Revelation. Chicago:  Moody Press, c1971, 13) 
               b. Some others
                    (I) Old Testament
                         (A) Ezekiel
                         (B) Zechariah
                    (II) New Testament--Revelation
          2. General considerations
               a. Often accompanied by divine interpretation
               b. Does not mean that its meaning is uncertain or obscure
               c. Apocalyptic revelation is legitimate.
               d. Careful consideration of  the context is needed.
     B. Its Interpretation
          1. General consideration
               a. Method of  interpretation
                    (I) Requires a recognition that it "is genuine Scripture and that detailed prediction of  the future as in Daniel
                         may be admitted as genuine, the problems of  interpretation are then reduced to determining what the text
                         actually says." (Walvoord, 25; bold type is this writer's.)
                    (II) This requires the literal, historical, grammatical method of  interpretation.
                    (III) The problem of  interpretation boils down to whether one allegorizes (generally to fit some pre-conceived
                         theology) or whether one takes it literally, what it actually says
               b. Means of  historical records
                    (I) "Historical records have been kind to Daniel in providing such adequate proofs of  the fulfillment of  his
                         prophecy as to induce the critics to want to place its writing after the event." (Ibid.)
                    (II) Again, the literal, historical, grammatical method of  interpretation shows its importance by the historical
                         record.
                    (III) Daniel clearly presents four great world empires, two of  which existed in his life time.
                    (IV) It is this presentation that threw the critics into a tizzy and prevented them from acknowledging this book
                         as genuine prophecy.
               c. Daniel 11:36-12:13 is a detailed description of  "the time of  the end," while Chapter 9:24-27 gives a clear
                    presentation of  the history of  Israel right up to the present (verse 27 still being future).  This will be discussed
                    in detail at its proper place.
               d. "Taken as a whole, the interpretation of  Daniel provides a broad outline of  the program of  God for the
                    Gentiles from Daniel to the second coming of  Christ and the program for Israel for the same period with
                    Daniel 9:24 beginning in Nehemiah's time." (Ibid.)

     On this web page this writer began a study of  the book of  Daniel.  He began to consider some introductory material, dealing with the date and authorship of  this book.  That the date of  Daniel was about 530 B. C. was seen.  The authorship was then pondered.  An examination that the Book of  Daniel, the mention of  Daniel by Ezekiel, and the authenticating of
the book by our Lord Himself was made.  The most recent manuscripts discovered, "the Qumran manuscripts," were seen to demonstrate the early date and authorship of  Daniel.  Finally, the six main objections to the early date and authorship of
Daniel were considered.  The book of  Daniel as to its place in our Bibles and its purpose was studied.  The character of  the book was pondered and the interpretation examined.  The more one studies the Bible, the word of  God, the more certain is one's faith in our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

     Have you trusted Him?  If  not, do so now.  It is the only way that you will be able to understand the Book of  Daniel or any other portion of   the Word of  God, the Bible.