Jump to content

Daniel 2: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
moved Daniel chapters template, rmoved dead links]
rm broken wiki links
Line 5: Line 5:
==Literary analysis==
==Literary analysis==
===Chiastic effect===
===Chiastic effect===
[[G.T.M. Prinsloo]] offers this outline to see the [[chiastic structure|chiastic effect]] for Daniel chapter 2:<ref>{{cite book|last=Prinsloo|first=G.T.M.|title=Two Poems in a Sea of Prose: The Context and Content of Daniel 2.20-23 and 6.27-28|year=1993|publisher=JSOT Press|location=Sheffield|author=G.T.M. Prinsloo|page=99}}</ref>
Prinsloo offers this outline to see the [[chiastic structure|chiastic effect]] for Daniel chapter 2:<ref>{{cite book|last=Prinsloo|first=G.T.M.|title=Two Poems in a Sea of Prose: The Context and Content of Daniel 2.20-23 and 6.27-28|year=1993|publisher=JSOT Press|location=Sheffield|author=G.T.M. Prinsloo|page=99}}</ref>


A. Introduction (''v''.1)
A. Introduction (''v''.1)
Line 18: Line 18:
The [[Book of Daniel#Literary structure|literary structure of the Book of Daniel]] illustrates the use of [[Aramaic]] in Daniel chapter 2. The first three verses of the source text are written in [[Hebrew]]. In verse 4, the Hebrew text says, "Then the Chaldeans spoke to the king in Aramaic"<sup>NKJV</sup> The actual source text is then written in [[Aramaic]] once they begin speaking to the King. It has been suggested that this was done on purpose to cue the reader, that what is to follow next in the reading, is now in ''Aramaic''. It is also an indication that this was the language that the wise men spoke as this was, after all, the official language in use at that time.<ref>J. G. Baldwin, "Book of Daniel" in ''New Bible Dictionary''3rd edition, IVP</ref> The text continues in ''Aramaic'' to the end of [[Daniel 7|Chapter 7]]. Then starting with [[Daniel 8|Chapter 8:1]], the source text returns to being written in [[Hebraic]] [[Masoretic text]] to the end of the book.<ref name="Oxford, 2.1-12">{{harvnb|Oxford annotated Bible|2007|p=1255, footnote 2.1-12}}</ref>
The [[Book of Daniel#Literary structure|literary structure of the Book of Daniel]] illustrates the use of [[Aramaic]] in Daniel chapter 2. The first three verses of the source text are written in [[Hebrew]]. In verse 4, the Hebrew text says, "Then the Chaldeans spoke to the king in Aramaic"<sup>NKJV</sup> The actual source text is then written in [[Aramaic]] once they begin speaking to the King. It has been suggested that this was done on purpose to cue the reader, that what is to follow next in the reading, is now in ''Aramaic''. It is also an indication that this was the language that the wise men spoke as this was, after all, the official language in use at that time.<ref>J. G. Baldwin, "Book of Daniel" in ''New Bible Dictionary''3rd edition, IVP</ref> The text continues in ''Aramaic'' to the end of [[Daniel 7|Chapter 7]]. Then starting with [[Daniel 8|Chapter 8:1]], the source text returns to being written in [[Hebraic]] [[Masoretic text]] to the end of the book.<ref name="Oxford, 2.1-12">{{harvnb|Oxford annotated Bible|2007|p=1255, footnote 2.1-12}}</ref>


The lack of continuity with other portions of Daniel are sometimes cited as evidence of editorial activity.<ref name ="Longman, 57">{{harvnb|Longman & Garland|2009|p=57}}</ref> [[Danna N. Fewell]] even suggests that the biblical text compromises the narrator’s reliability as an accurate storyteller.<ref>{{cite book|last=editor|first=Danna Nolan Fewell,|title=Reading between texts : intertextuality and the Hebrew Bible|year=1992|publisher=Westminster/John Knox Press|location=Louisville, Ky.|isbn=978-0-664-25393-6|edition=1st ed.|page=62}}</ref> However, [[John E. Goldingay]] suggests that these instances of repetitiveness and the lack of continuity in Daniel chapter 2, is the "responsibility of the author as a [[redactor]]".<ref>{{harvnb|Goldingay|1989|p=44}}</ref>
The lack of continuity with other portions of Daniel are sometimes cited as evidence of editorial activity.<ref name ="Longman, 57">{{harvnb|Longman & Garland|2009|p=57}}</ref> Danna N. Fewell suggests that the biblical text compromises the narrator’s reliability as an accurate storyteller.<ref>{{cite book|last=editor|first=Danna Nolan Fewell,|title=Reading between texts : intertextuality and the Hebrew Bible|year=1992|publisher=Westminster/John Knox Press|location=Louisville, Ky.|isbn=978-0-664-25393-6|edition=1st ed.|page=62}}</ref> However, [[John E. Goldingay]] suggests that these instances of repetitiveness and the lack of continuity in Daniel chapter 2, is the "responsibility of the author as a [[redactor]]".<ref>{{harvnb|Goldingay|1989|p=44}}</ref>


===Redaction criticism===
===Redaction criticism===
Line 56: Line 56:
===Commentaries on verses===
===Commentaries on verses===
;Verses 1-12:
;Verses 1-12:
Introduces Nebuchadnezzar’s volatile behavior. The king of Babylon experienced dreams that troubled him and kept him awake at nights. He demands an interpretation of the dreams and threatens a violent execution if he is not satisfied. The text implies a hint of distrust toward his magicians’ abilities to interpret his dreams.<ref>{{harvnb|Oxford annotated Bible|2007|p=1255, footnote 2.5}}</ref> According to [[Artimedorus]]’s “[[Oneirocritica]]”: ''Dreams'', especially those of kings, were regarded as [[portents]].<ref>{{harvnb|Oxford annotated Bible|2007|p=1255, footnote 2.1}}</ref> Because this class of servants failed to interpret his dreams, the King orders their deaths throughout all of Babylon. It is suggested that the King’s order to have these wise men of Babylon killed, [[foreshadow]]s his irrational behavior in ''Daniel chapter 4''.<ref>{{harvnb|Oxford annotated Bible|2007|p=1256, footnote 2.12}}</ref>
Introduces Nebuchadnezzar’s volatile behavior. The king of Babylon experienced dreams that troubled him and kept him awake at nights. He demands an interpretation of the dreams and threatens a violent execution if he is not satisfied. The text implies a hint of distrust toward his magicians’ abilities to interpret his dreams.<ref>{{harvnb|Oxford annotated Bible|2007|p=1255, footnote 2.5}}</ref> According to Artimedorus’s “[[Oneirocritica]]”: ''Dreams'', especially those of kings, were regarded as [[portents]].<ref>{{harvnb|Oxford annotated Bible|2007|p=1255, footnote 2.1}}</ref> Because this class of servants failed to interpret his dreams, the King orders their deaths throughout all of Babylon. It is suggested that the King’s order to have these wise men of Babylon killed, [[foreshadow]]s his irrational behavior in ''Daniel chapter 4''.<ref>{{harvnb|Oxford annotated Bible|2007|p=1256, footnote 2.12}}</ref>


;Verses 13-19:
;Verses 13-19:
Line 121: Line 121:
# Feet partly of iron and partly of molded clay - The divided Roman Empire
# Feet partly of iron and partly of molded clay - The divided Roman Empire


Supporters of this view since [[classical antiquity]] through the [[middle ages]] are: [[Flavius Josephus]], [[Hippolytus of Rome|Hippolytus]], [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]], [[Thomas Aquinas]], and [[Martin Luther]]. Jewish expositors have also held this view, such as: [[Japet Ibn Ali]], [[Saadia Gaon|Saadia]], [[Rashi]], [[Abraham Ibn Ezra]].<ref>[[Le Roy Froom|Froom, Le Roy Edwin]], 1948, ''The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers'', 4 Volumes, Review and Herald Publishing Association. Pp. 4000+/-</ref> "The Reformation ... was really born of a twofold discovery--first, the rediscovery of Christ and His salvation; and second, the discovery of the identity of Antichrist and his subversions."<ref>{{harvnb|Froom|1948|p=243}}</ref> "The reformers were unanimous in its acceptance. And it was this interpretation of prophecy that lent emphasis to their reformatory action. It led them to protest against Rome with extraordinary strength and undaunted courage. ... This was the rallying point and the battle cry that made the Reformation unconquerable."<ref>{{harvnb|Froom|1948|pp=244, 245}}</ref> Modern scholars who hold this view are: [[Edward Joseph Young|E. J. Young]], [[Seventh-day Adventist Church|Seventh-day Adventist]] [[Gerhard Pfandl]],<ref>E. J. Young, ''The Messianic Prophecies of Daniel'', 1952.</ref><ref>Pfandl, Gerhard 2004, Daniel, the Seer of Babylon, Review and Herald Publishing Association. p. 59.</ref> and [[John Walvoord|John F. Walvoord]].<ref name = "Walvoord, 11"/> [[Evangelicals]], such as [[Henrietta Mears|Henrietta C. Mears]], and [[Billy Graham]] also share this view.<ref>{{cite book|last=Mears|first=Henrietta|title=What the Bible is all about|year=1999|publisher=Regal Books|location=Ventura, Calif.|isbn=0-8307-4329-4|edition=null|page=174}}</ref>
Supporters of this view since [[classical antiquity]] through the [[middle ages]] are: [[Flavius Josephus]], [[Hippolytus of Rome|Hippolytus]], [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]], [[Thomas Aquinas]], and [[Martin Luther]]. Jewish expositors have also held this view, such as: Japet Ibn Ali, [[Saadia Gaon|Saadia]], [[Rashi]], [[Abraham Ibn Ezra]].<ref>[[Le Roy Froom|Froom, Le Roy Edwin]], 1948, ''The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers'', 4 Volumes, Review and Herald Publishing Association. Pp. 4000+/-</ref> "The Reformation ... was really born of a twofold discovery--first, the rediscovery of Christ and His salvation; and second, the discovery of the identity of Antichrist and his subversions."<ref>{{harvnb|Froom|1948|p=243}}</ref> "The reformers were unanimous in its acceptance. And it was this interpretation of prophecy that lent emphasis to their reformatory action. It led them to protest against Rome with extraordinary strength and undaunted courage. ... This was the rallying point and the battle cry that made the Reformation unconquerable."<ref>{{harvnb|Froom|1948|pp=244, 245}}</ref> Modern scholars who hold this view are: [[Edward Joseph Young|E. J. Young]], Gerhard Pfandl,<ref>E. J. Young, ''The Messianic Prophecies of Daniel'', 1952.</ref><ref>Pfandl, Gerhard 2004, Daniel, the Seer of Babylon, Review and Herald Publishing Association. p. 59.</ref> and [[John Walvoord|John F. Walvoord]].<ref name = "Walvoord, 11"/> [[Evangelicals]], such as [[Henrietta Mears|Henrietta C. Mears]], and [[Billy Graham]] also share this view.<ref>{{cite book|last=Mears|first=Henrietta|title=What the Bible is all about|year=1999|publisher=Regal Books|location=Ventura, Calif.|isbn=0-8307-4329-4|edition=null|page=174}}</ref>


====Seventh-day Adventist interpretation====
====Seventh-day Adventist interpretation====
Line 169: Line 169:


===Dispensational interpretation===
===Dispensational interpretation===
Adherents of the ''Maccabean thesis'' view the four successive empires as culminating with the [[Seleucid Empire|Seleucid Greek period]] of king [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]]. These scholars argue that Daniel had believed that the Median empire followed Babylon, and was then displaced by Persia.<ref>{{cite book|last=Miller|first=Stephen R.|title=Daniel|year=1994|publisher=Broadman & Holman|location=Nashville, Tenn.|isbn=978-0-8054-0118-9|edition=null|page=94}}</ref> Therefore, in their analysis of the narrative, the Median and Persian Empires should be viewed as separate. Those who subscribe to the ''Maccabean thesis'' are: Hartman, [[Alexander Di Lella]], [[Lacocque]], Montgomery,<ref>{{cite book|last=Miller|first=Stephen R.|title=Daniel|year=1994|publisher=Broadman & Holman|location=Nashville, Tenn.|isbn=978-0-8054-0118-9|edition=null|pages=173–4}}</ref> [[Norman Porteous]],<ref>{{cite book|last=Porteous|first=Norman W.|year=1965|publisher=Westminster Press|page=48}}</ref> and [[John J. Collins]].<ref>[http://books.google.ca/books?id=PxjNsMrzI-kC&pg=PA95 The apocalyptic imagination: an introduction to Jewish apocalyptic literature, John Joseph Collins, p. 95]</ref> Conservative Christian scholars who also share this view are: [[H. H. Rowley]],<ref>H. H. Rowley, ''Darius the Mede and the Four World empires in the Book of Daniel'', 1935</ref> Gurney, [[Ernest Lucas|Ernest C. Lucas]],<ref name=lucas>Ernest C. Lucas, Daniel, Apollos Old Testament Commentary</ref> and [[J. H. Walton]].<ref>J. H. Walton, "The Four Kingdoms of Daniel," ''JETS'' 29(1986):25-36.</ref>
Adherents of the ''Maccabean thesis'' view the four successive empires as culminating with the [[Seleucid Empire|Seleucid Greek period]] of king [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]]. These scholars argue that Daniel had believed that the Median empire followed Babylon, and was then displaced by Persia.<ref>{{cite book|last=Miller|first=Stephen R.|title=Daniel|year=1994|publisher=Broadman & Holman|location=Nashville, Tenn.|isbn=978-0-8054-0118-9|edition=null|page=94}}</ref> Therefore, in their analysis of the narrative, the Median and Persian Empires should be viewed as separate. Those who subscribe to the ''Maccabean thesis'' are: Hartman, Alexander Di Lella, Lacocque, Montgomery,<ref>{{cite book|last=Miller|first=Stephen R.|title=Daniel|year=1994|publisher=Broadman & Holman|location=Nashville, Tenn.|isbn=978-0-8054-0118-9|edition=null|pages=173–4}}</ref> [[Norman Porteous]],<ref>{{cite book|last=Porteous|first=Norman W.|year=1965|publisher=Westminster Press|page=48}}</ref> and [[John J. Collins]].<ref>[http://books.google.ca/books?id=PxjNsMrzI-kC&pg=PA95 The apocalyptic imagination: an introduction to Jewish apocalyptic literature, John Joseph Collins, p. 95]</ref> Conservative Christian scholars who also share this view are: H. H. Rowley,<ref>H. H. Rowley, ''Darius the Mede and the Four World empires in the Book of Daniel'', 1935</ref> Gurney, Ernest Lucas,<ref name=lucas>Ernest C. Lucas, Daniel, Apollos Old Testament Commentary</ref> and J. H. Walton.<ref>J. H. Walton, "The Four Kingdoms of Daniel," ''JETS'' 29(1986):25-36.</ref>


The proposed identities are:
The proposed identities are:
Line 195: Line 195:
The following [[Dead sea scrolls]], discovered in the [[Judean desert]], contain some passages in ''Daniel'' 2:<ref>{{harvnb|VanderKam|2002|p=423}}</ref>
The following [[Dead sea scrolls]], discovered in the [[Judean desert]], contain some passages in ''Daniel'' 2:<ref>{{harvnb|VanderKam|2002|p=423}}</ref>


* [[1QDana|1QDan<sup>a<sup>]] (2:2-6)
* 1QDan<sup>a<sup> (2:2-6)
* [[4QDana|4QDan<sup>a<sup>]] (2:9-11, 19-49)
* 4QDan<sup>a<sup> (2:9-11, 19-49)


==Appendix==
==Appendix==

Revision as of 01:56, 6 December 2012

Stained glass depiction of Daniel interceding with Arioch, the king's guard. Arioch had been charged with killing all the wise men after they were not able to interpret Nebuchadnezzar's dream.
Chapters of the Book of Daniel
Daniel's Answer to the King by Briton Rivière

Additions to Daniel:

Daniel 2 is the second chapter of the Book of Daniel in the Hebrew Bible. The chapter's source text is predominantly written in Aramaic. According to the text, Nebuchadnezzar is the king of Babylon who is troubled by his dreams. He demands an interpretation for his dreams or will have his mystic interpreters executed. Daniel seeks Divine Wisdom to interpret the King's dreams and praises God with a short psalm. God gives Daniel a vision in the night to reveal the King's dream. Able to satisfy the King, Daniel is promoted over the whole province of Babylon.

Literary analysis

Chiastic effect

Prinsloo offers this outline to see the chiastic effect for Daniel chapter 2:[1]

A. Introduction (v.1)

B. The king and his unwise courtiers (vv.2-12)
C. Daniel and Arioch (vv.13-16)
D. Daniel and his friends pray to God (vv.17-23)
C'. Daniel and Arioch (vv.24-25)
B'. The king and Daniel, the wise courtier (vv.26-47)

A'. Result (vv.48-49)

Literary criticism

The literary structure of the Book of Daniel illustrates the use of Aramaic in Daniel chapter 2. The first three verses of the source text are written in Hebrew. In verse 4, the Hebrew text says, "Then the Chaldeans spoke to the king in Aramaic"NKJV The actual source text is then written in Aramaic once they begin speaking to the King. It has been suggested that this was done on purpose to cue the reader, that what is to follow next in the reading, is now in Aramaic. It is also an indication that this was the language that the wise men spoke as this was, after all, the official language in use at that time.[2] The text continues in Aramaic to the end of Chapter 7. Then starting with Chapter 8:1, the source text returns to being written in Hebraic Masoretic text to the end of the book.[3]

The lack of continuity with other portions of Daniel are sometimes cited as evidence of editorial activity.[4] Danna N. Fewell suggests that the biblical text compromises the narrator’s reliability as an accurate storyteller.[5] However, John E. Goldingay suggests that these instances of repetitiveness and the lack of continuity in Daniel chapter 2, is the "responsibility of the author as a redactor".[6]

Redaction criticism

With the second chapter being set in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign,[v.1] it appears to conflict with Chapter 1, where Daniel and his companions were supposed to go through a three year training course in the Babylonian academy.[1:5] Their final examination wouldn’t be due until the end of that three-year period.[1:18] However, literary irony could be drawn from the narrative in that Daniel was a mere trainee in the Babylonian academy, who was able to outperform the King’s full-fledged experts. A common motif in similar stories of the same literary genre, is the novice making fools of the experts. From the perspective of redaction criticism, the focus would be on the theological motif in that attention is not given to Daniel’s gifts, nor his Chaldean education. Rather, events unfold due to the Divine Wisdom and power that belongs to God alone.[v.13-19] This is indicated when Daniel urged his companions to seek God’s mercy for the interpretation of the King’s dreams and from Daniel’s doxology.[v.20-23][7] Numerous other solutions have been proposed for the seeming anachronism, as early as Flavius Josephus. Jerome and several others suggested the second year of Nebuchadnezzar was counted not from his rule over Babylon alone, but from his universal rule following his conquest of Egypt.[8] One recent study proposes the second year dates from the consolidation of the Babylonian kingdom when Nebuchadnezzar appointed Zedekiah, placing the dream in 595 BCE.[9]

Form criticism

According to form critics, Daniel 2 is made up numerous literary subgenres: a court tale, a dream report, a legend, an aretalogy, a doxology, and a midrash.[10][4] In regards to the theme of interpreting kings’ dreams and being promoted to prominence, parallels can be drawn between Daniel in Nebuchadnezzar’s court and Joseph in Pharaoh’s court.[11] Form-critical scholars attribute this to a shared folklore pattern of a success story where the lower-class hero solves a problem for the higher-class person and is then rewarded for doing so.[12]

Content

King troubled by dreams

The second chapter of Daniel introduces the time setting “in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar”.KJV The king is distressed by his dreams [v.1] and summons his interpreters.[v.2] A dialogue, in Aramaic, occurs between the king and Chaldeans [v.3] where they request from the King that he relate his dream to them.[v.4] However, the King threatens the Chaldeans that they show him his dream and interpret it, lest they be executed.[v.5] Should they fulfill his request, he promises gifts. The King imposes on the Chaldeans the impossible demand, that they show him the dream and interpret it.[v.6] The Chaldeans request a second time for the King to relate the dream to them.[v.7] The King responds by charging them for buying time,[v.8] and charging them for conspiracy to lie. The impossible demand was renewed.[v.9] The Chaldeans deny that any man can do it, and deny that any king has ever asked it [v.10] and assert that only the gods can do it.[v.11] The dialogue concludes with the King acting in fury and demanding the execution of all the wise men in Babylon.[v.12][13]

Daniel and Arioch

After Daniel is introduced as one of the wise men,[v.13] dialogue occurs between Daniel and the captain of the king’s guard, Arioch.[v.14] Daniel’s prudence is noticed and he requests an explanation of the things that are happening. The captain responds with an indirect report.[v.15] Daniel requests for an appointment with the King.[v.16] Daniel makes known the King’s decree to his three companions [v.17] and instructs them to pray for God’s mercy to receive revelation of the King’s dream.[v.18] God then reveals the mystery to Daniel in a vision that night.[v.19][14]

Daniel’s doxology

Daniel’s doxology is a benediction that affirms God’s Divine wisdom and might.[v.20] It illustrates the control of times, power over kings, distribution of wisdom and knowledge,[v.21] and the Revelation of mysteries. The acknowledgement of darkness is contrasted with the association of light.[v.22] A declaration of thanks and praise is given for what God has given to Daniel, namely: wisdom, strength and the revelation of the King’s dream.[v.23][14]

Daniel approaches the King

In verses 24-30, Daniel goes to the king and asks for a chance to tell him what the dream was and its interpretation. Daniel then prays for the God of Heaven to reveal the dream and the interpretation. Daniel then explains it to Nebuchadnezzar as presaging what shall be "in the last days" (Aramaic:באחרית יומיא) (28).

Nebuchadnezzar’s dream

Nebuchadnezzar's dream: the composite statue (France, 15th century).

The description of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream describes a "great image, whose brightness [was] excellent... and the form thereof [was] terrible."[v.31] A general description of the personified image is given from head to toe: whose head was made of fine gold, a chest and arms of silver, a belly of brass,[v.32] legs of iron, and feet made partly of iron and partly of clay.[v.33] The vision is then continued by relating the Vision of stone, its characterization: "not cut by hands", and its action that causes a dispersion of the statue’s metals.[v.34] The stone grows to fill the whole Earth.[v.35] Thus concludes the presentation of the dream followed by its interpretation, by the formula: “this is the dream”.[v.36][15]

Daniel's interpretation

The king, Nebuchadnezzar, is the head of gold.[v.37-38] There will be another kingdom who will rise, succeeding Nebuchadnezzar, but inferior.[v.39] Followed by a Third kingdom who will rule over the whole earth.[v.39] Then, a Fourth kingdom will be as strong as iron and will crush all others.[v.40] The kingdom of iron becomes divided,[v.41] being partly strong like iron, and partly weak like clay.[v.42] The intermarriage between the two parts will fail.[v.43][15]

Daniel’s promotion

The second chapter of Daniel concludes with the king expressing homage to Daniel for relating his dream and interpreting it.[v.46] The king also relates his own doxology by affirming that God is God of gods for revealing the mystery of his dream.[v.47] The king honors Daniel and promotes him as chief governor over the whole province of Babylon.[v.48] At Daniel’s request, the companions are also promoted. Daniel remains at the king’s court.[v.49][16]

Narrative analysis

The narrative plot of Daniel chapter 2 is one of contest on a human level and a spiritual level. On the human level of understanding, the narrative conflict is the king’s dreams that cause him to rival against his corps of royal advisors. Daniel’s role is one of contest against the royal advisors to interpret the king’s dream. On a spiritual level, the narrative plot is the conflict between Yahweh, the God of Israel as the true God, verses the pantheon of idolized Babylonian gods. The cosmic dimension of the contest, to interpret the king’s dream, is the ultimate source of knowledge and wisdom: the God of the Hebrews or the occult lore of the Babylonian wise men.[4]

Commentaries on verses

Verses 1-12

Introduces Nebuchadnezzar’s volatile behavior. The king of Babylon experienced dreams that troubled him and kept him awake at nights. He demands an interpretation of the dreams and threatens a violent execution if he is not satisfied. The text implies a hint of distrust toward his magicians’ abilities to interpret his dreams.[17] According to Artimedorus’s “Oneirocritica”: Dreams, especially those of kings, were regarded as portents.[18] Because this class of servants failed to interpret his dreams, the King orders their deaths throughout all of Babylon. It is suggested that the King’s order to have these wise men of Babylon killed, foreshadows his irrational behavior in Daniel chapter 4.[19]

Verses 13-19

Daniel seeks divine aid, which suggests that he and his colleagues were not present at the earlier meeting with the king. The captain of the King’s guard, Arioch is unattested in historical criticism. He is willing to disregard the king’s order to kill all the wise men of Babylon, in order to help Daniel.[20] This appears to contrast with verse 24 where Daniel requires Arioch’s intervention in order to see the King.[21] This discrepancy along with the reintroduction of Daniel’s companions in verse 17,[22] suggests that verses 13-23 are later additions to the story.[21] Daniel urged his companions to seek God’s mercy to reveal the mystery or secret of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. The term Mystery is frequently found in the scrolls from Qumran, the Dead Sea Scrolls, that often indicates a secret that can be learned through Divine wisdom.[23] Daniel receives a vision in the night, to interpret Nebuchadnezzar’s dream.[24]

Verses 20-23

The doxology of Daniel is a short psalm[25] that emphasizes the Divine as a repository of wisdom. Hymns and prayers are frequently inserted into postexilic narratives.[26] Daniel's praise of God and His ability to depose kings, serves to foreshadow the end of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign.[27]

Verses 31-35

The personified giant image in the King's dream, was made up of metals of decreasing worth, starting from the head to the toes. They represent the Golden age through the Silver, Bronze and Iron periods. Parallels can also be drawn from Greek (Hesiod, Works and Days), Latin (Ovid, Metamorphosis)[28] and Persian (Bahman Yasht) writings.[29] The mention of clay however is unexpected due to its weakness in substance. There is an irony, or potential humor, that can be drawn by the description of the clay serving as a support for the weightier metals.[30]

Verses 46-49

Nebuchadnezzar prostrated himself and worshiped Daniel, commanding offerings and incense to him. This suggests that the King viewed Daniel as divine.[31] The King acknowledges the God of Daniel and honors Him. However, Nebuchadnezzar never converts. This parallels the narrative of Antiochus IV Epiphanes who made death-bed promises, as indicated in 2 Maccabees 9:17.[32] Daniel is then given gifts and is promoted to rule over the whole province of Babylon as Chief Governor over the wise men.[33] Daniel takes this opportunity to have his companions: Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego appointed over the affairs of the province. The mention and promotion of the companions builds anticipation for the events they will face in the proceeding chapter,[34] where their allegiance is tested.

Image of kingdoms

Daniel's interpretation of the body parts, of the personified image, are symbolic of nations. These kingdoms will be world empires who “will rule over the whole earth”. The identification of the kingdoms, following Nebuchadnezzar, are symbolized by inferior metals: silver, bronze, iron/clay, which imply gradual decline.[35]

John Phillips even compares each of the metal’s specific gravity as being significant to the prophecy. Gold has a specific gravity of 19.3, silver at 10.51, brass at 8.5, iron at 7.6 and clay at 1.9.[36]

Head of gold

The king, Nebuchadnezzar, is the head of gold.[v.37-38]

As Babylon

David P. Jeremiah points out that the chief deity of Babylon was Marduk who was considered to be the “god of gold”. The historian Herodotus described the image of Marduk as a golden statue seated upon a golden throne before a golden table and a golden alter. Pliny also notes that the robes of Marduk’s priests were interlaced with gold.[37]

Mark Mangano[38] points out that the use of the word “another”, in v.39, suggests that the Neo-Babylonian Empire had been implied in the identification of Nebuchadnezzar with the “head of gold”. The Neo-Babylonian Empire had been founded by Nabopolassar (626-605 BCE), the father of Nebuchadnezzar. Nebuchadnezzar was followed by Amel-Marduk (562-560 BCE), the Evil-Merodach of the Book of 2 Kings 25:27-30, Neriglissar (560-556 BCE), Labashi-Marduk (556 BCE), and Nabonidus (556-539 BCE), the final king of the Neo-Babylonian Empire.[39]

Christian theologian John Walvoord, also concurs that the Babylonian empire is this head of gold.[40]

However, John Phillips contests that it was only Nebuchadnezzar who was the head of gold. He rejects the idea that the Babylonian empire was part of the head of gold, because he points out the following: The father, Nabopolassar didn't achieve what his son Nebuchadnezzar did, and that was conquering Jerusalem. Evil-Merodach only sat on the Babylonian throne for two years. Neriglassar only had the kingdom for three years and accomplished little beyond building a palace that ended up falling into Persian hands. Though Nabonidus reigned fifteen years, his reign was overshadowed by the Medes and Persians. Finally, Phillips views Belshazzar as being a dissolute young prince who imagined Babylon to be impregnable.[41]

Chest and arms of silver

This will be another kingdom who will rise, succeeding Nebuchadnezzar, but inferior.[v.39][15]

Belly and thighs of bronze

This is the third kingdom who will rule over the whole earth.[v.39]

Legs of iron

A fourth kingdom will be as strong as iron and will crush all others.[v.40]

Feet of iron and clay

See also: Feet of clay

The feet made of iron and clay show that this kingdom becomes divided,[v.41] being partly strong like iron, and partly weak like clay.[v.42] The intermarriage between the two parts will fail.[v.43][15]

Jerome postulates that since clay and iron do not bond together, this kingdom is intrinsically weak.[35] Unity is impossible and the kingdom is vulnerable because it seeks to unite elements that do not coalesce.[42]

Vision of the stone

God will set up a kingdom that will shatter the other kingdoms and it will stand forever.[v.44] The stone is described as being cut out of the mountain without hands and reiterates how it will break into pieces the image of metal, in this particular order: the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold. It concludes with an affirmation of divine revelation and a certainty of the interpretation.[v.45][15]

Interpretations of idol image

Main article: Four monarchies

Over the centuries, scholars have proposed two alternative interpretations regarding the identification of the four kingdoms in Daniel 2. The oldest view holds that the Median and Persian empires were combined as one, as Medo-Persia. The alternate view considers that the empires were separate in relation to the Daniel narrative.

Historicist interpretation

The following view has traditionally been more prevalent among Christian scholars, who identify the four kingdoms with unified Medo-Persia:

  1. Head of gold - Babylon
  2. Breast and arms of silver- Medo-Persia
  3. Belly and thighs of brass- Hellenistic Greece
  4. Legs of iron - Rome
  5. Feet partly of iron and partly of molded clay - The divided Roman Empire

Supporters of this view since classical antiquity through the middle ages are: Flavius Josephus, Hippolytus, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and Martin Luther. Jewish expositors have also held this view, such as: Japet Ibn Ali, Saadia, Rashi, Abraham Ibn Ezra.[43] "The Reformation ... was really born of a twofold discovery--first, the rediscovery of Christ and His salvation; and second, the discovery of the identity of Antichrist and his subversions."[44] "The reformers were unanimous in its acceptance. And it was this interpretation of prophecy that lent emphasis to their reformatory action. It led them to protest against Rome with extraordinary strength and undaunted courage. ... This was the rallying point and the battle cry that made the Reformation unconquerable."[45] Modern scholars who hold this view are: E. J. Young, Gerhard Pfandl,[46][47] and John F. Walvoord.[40] Evangelicals, such as Henrietta C. Mears, and Billy Graham also share this view.[48]

Seventh-day Adventist interpretation

See also: Seventh-day_Adventist_eschatology § Four kingdoms of Daniel

The Seventh-day Adventist interpretation of the statue is inherited from the Millerite movement.

Chapter Parallel sequence of prophetic elements as understood by Historicists[49][50]
Past Present Future
Daniel 2 Head
Gold
(Babylon) 		Chest & 2 arms
Silver
(Media-Persia) 		Belly and thighs
Bronze
(Greece) 		2 Legs
Iron
(Rome) 		2 Feet with toes
Clay & Iron
Global religio-political
Government 		Rock
God's unending kingdom
left to no other people

As the iron and clay are materials that simply cannot be used together to form a durable structure, Adventist scholars interpret this as the many short-lived successes throughout European history by various people to form a large empire or to form Europe into one large entity, such as the Holy Roman Empire, Napoleonic France, Nazi Germany, The European Union. Some propose a future religo-political power developed and enforced by a global superpower—a Common Government

Jehovah's Witnesses interpretation

In the Jehovah's Witnesses' interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream,[51] the statue is said to represent the following kingdoms:

  1. The gold head - Babylon
  2. The silver breast and arms - Medo-Persia
  3. The copper belly and thighs - Greece
  4. The iron legs - Rome
  5. The feet partly of iron and partly of molded clay - The Anglo-American World Power

The Anglo-American power is seen as the last dominant world power, emerging from a part of the Roman Empire (the iron legs) first as the British Empire, and then with the formation of the United States of America, to develop into the present-day special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom. However the prophecy comments on the general state of human rule in addition to the last dominant human world power. This state is represented by the iron-and-clay, feet and toes of the statue. The iron and clay represent three characteristics of human rule, in general, during the time of the end (Vss 41-43): 1) These are incompatible materials, in that they do not mix. This represents the traditional authoritarian rule uneasy coexisting with democratic rule. 2) The "lack of sticking together" describes the political fragmentation throughout human rule in the last days. 3) The focus of the clay as "the offspring of mankind" represents the common people having a say in how they are ruled during this time.

The "kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and ... not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever", in verse 44 of the prophecy, is said by Witnesses to be the heavenly kingdom established by God, with Jesus as appointed King, which will ultimately bring to an end human rulership. This Kingdom will rule the earth. It is a special government sponsored by God's Universal Sovereignty (the mountain in vs 35) to restore humans to perfection and restore the physical earth to its original and intended state of paradise.

Jehovah's Witnesses also believe that the sequence of world powers in Nebuchadnezzar's dream parallels that given in the vision in the Book of Revelation Chapter 17, verse 10 which speaks of "seven kings: five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet arrived". (Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia and Greece having "fallen" by the time Revelation was written; Rome was the world power at the time - "one is" - while the British Empire and subsequent emergence of the United States and their later alliance was then yet to come, hence "the other has not yet arrived".)

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon) interpretation

The story in Daniel 2 has significant meaning to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, who believe that the true church was restored to the earth in the "latter days" through a modern prophet, Joseph Smith, in 1830.

Spencer Kimball explained in 1976, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was restored in 1830. ...This is the kingdom, set up by the God of heaven, that would never be destroyed nor superseded, and the stone cut out of the mountain without hands that would become a great mountain and would fill the whole earth." Kimball agreed with the view of most Christians that the third kingdom represented that of Alexander the Great, the fourth represented the Roman Empire, and the feet of iron and clay represented a group of European nations, which were the great political powers at the time the Latter Day Saint movement was founded.[52][53]

Dispensational interpretation

Adherents of the Maccabean thesis view the four successive empires as culminating with the Seleucid Greek period of king Antiochus IV Epiphanes. These scholars argue that Daniel had believed that the Median empire followed Babylon, and was then displaced by Persia.[54] Therefore, in their analysis of the narrative, the Median and Persian Empires should be viewed as separate. Those who subscribe to the Maccabean thesis are: Hartman, Alexander Di Lella, Lacocque, Montgomery,[55] Norman Porteous,[56] and John J. Collins.[57] Conservative Christian scholars who also share this view are: H. H. Rowley,[58] Gurney, Ernest Lucas,[59] and J. H. Walton.[60]

The proposed identities are:

  1. Head of gold - Babylonian Empire
  2. Breast and arms of silver - Median Empire
  3. Belly and thighs of copper - Persian Empire
  4. Legs of iron - Seleucid Empire
  5. Feet partly of iron and partly of molded clay - The Seleucids and the Ptolemies

Daniel 2:43 ("they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another") in the second view refers to the unsuccessful marriage alliances between the Seleucids and Ptolemies.(Daniel 11:6, 11:17)[59][61] According to scholars who hold to this view, only these two successors to the Greek Kingdom were of interest to the author and his Jewish readers since these two dynasties had direct relation to Jewish affairs. They often fought over the ownership of Judea and the control of Jews in the 2nd century BC (Daniel 11:2–35).[62][63]

Criticism of vision

The criticism of the book of Daniel is that it is a pseudepigraph dated to the mid-2nd century BC, concerned primarily with the Maccabean era and the reign of the Seleucid king Antiochus Epiphanes.[64] The vision of the four kingdoms: Babylon, Media, Persia, and Greece, are associated with the theory that the book of Daniel terminates in the Hellenist era, and the "kingdom" represented by the stone may refer to the Hasmonean dynasty. This dynasty was set up by the Maccabees after their defeat of the Seleucid forces.[65][66]

However, many Christian scholars[clarification needed] do not accept this interpretation, largely because Jesus is said in Matthew 24 to have quoted Daniel as a prophet who foretold future events. Some scholars believe that Jesus placed the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy at the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70,;[67][68] others think he was describing the "end of the age" (Matt. 24:3), immediately preceding Judgement Day.[69] Therefore, their identification of the metals in the statue with empires tends to differ somewhat from the above-mentioned view of the scholars. Instead, the vision is considered to be about the development of Babylon and its successors, from the time of Nebuchadnezzar all the way to the future day when God's eternal Kingdom will be established.

The identification of the gold head is not disputed, as the text clearly indicates that it represents Nebuchadnezzar himself, and by extension, the Babylonian Empire. However, in this view, the second kingdom, represented by the chest and arms of silver, is identified with the combined Medo-Persian empire (which commenced when the Persian king Cyrus the Great defeated Babylon.) The third kingdom, represented by the belly of bronze, is thought to be the Hellenic empire of Alexander and his successors. The fourth kingdom of iron legs becomes the Roman Republic. Finally, the fifth kingdom, represented by the iron and clay feet, becomes the Roman Empire[citation needed].

In Christian interpretations[by whom?], the Kingdom of God (represented by the stone that destroys the statue) may be considered in a spiritual sense, as the kingdom set up by Jesus through his death and resurrection during the time of the Roman empire; or alternatively as the literal and physical kingdom that Jesus will set up at his second coming, in which case the feet and toes of part iron and part clay must represent the nations which take the place of the Roman empire until the end of time.[70]

Aside from certain scholarly views[by whom?] that maintain the book was written in the time of Antiochus IV, the chapter itself claims to take place in the "second year of Nebuchadnezzar". This could refer to 604 BC, the second year he reigned in Babylon, or it might also possibly mean 587 BC, the second year of his reign over Judah after deposing his last puppet, king Zedekiah[citation needed].

Dead sea scrolls

The following Dead sea scrolls, discovered in the Judean desert, contain some passages in Daniel 2:[71]

  • 1QDana (2:2-6)
  • 4QDana (2:9-11, 19-49)

Appendix

Over the centuries Bible Scholars have identified specific kingdoms as fulfillment of the symbols in the image as illustrated in the following table.

Interpretations of the kingdoms of Daniel 2 by Biblical expositors from the 1st to 19th centuries
Interpretations of the kingdoms of Daniel 2 by Biblical Expositors of the Early Church Period: 100-457 AD[72]
BPGR= Babylon - Media/Persia - Greece - Rome. [BPGR] = Implies...
4 metals Feet/toes Stone Kgdm
Josephus c. 100 BPG[R] Mess. Kgdm.
Yochanan ben Zakai 1st cent. [BPGR]
Akiva ben Joseph d. 132 BPGR
Sibyllines 3rd cent. BPGR
Hippolytus d. 238 BPGR 10 Kgdms 2nd Adv.
Tertullian c. 240 [BPGR] 10 Kgdms 2nd Adv.
Origen c. 254 [Allegorizes all Prophecies]
Cyprian c. 258 Nearing
Irenaeus c. 292 BPGR 10-fold div. After div.
Porphyry c. 304 [Not Prophecy but History]
Victorinus c. 304
Lactantius c. 330 [BPGR] Divisions
Eusebius of Caesarea c. 340 BPGR 10 Kgdms Kgdm. God
Aphrahat c. 350 BPGR Divisions at 2nd Adv.
Cyril of Alexandria w. 386 [BPGR] Etern. Kgdm.
John Chrysostom w. 407 BPGR Divisions Chr. Kgdm.
Sulpicius Severus c. 420 [BPG]R Pres. Divis. Fut. Kgdm.
Jerome w. 420 BPGR Pres. Divis. After Destr.
Polychronius w. 430 BP-Alex. Alex. Succ.
Isidore of Pelusium w. 450 BPGR
Theodoret w. 457 BPGR Divisions at 2nd Adv.
Biblical Expositors of the Early Medieval Period: 400-1200 AD[73]
4 metals Feet/toes Stone Kgdm
Augustine d. 430 [BPGR] Cath. Ch.
Andreas Osiander 7st Cent. [BPGR] Multi. Kgdms.
Sargis D'Aberga 7st Cent. BPGR
Venerable Bede d. 735 [BPGR] Church
Berengaud 9th Cent. [BPG]R
Eliezer 8-9th Cent. BPGR Mess. Kgdm.
Saadia d. 942 BPG-Gog
Jephet ibn Ali 10th Cent. BPGR Rome & Arabs Mess. Kgdm.
Rashi d. 1105 B PGR Divisions Mess. Kgdm.
Abraham ibn Ezra d. 1167 BPG[R] Rome & Ishm. Mess. Kgdm.
Peter Comestor d. 1178 BPGR Divisions Kgdm. of God
Joachim of Floris d. 1202 BPGR-Sar. Final Kgdm. Heavenly
Thomas Aquinas d. 1274 BPGR
Biblical Expositors of the Reformation Era: 1522-1614 AD[74]
4 metals Feet/toes Stone Kgdm
Martin Luther 1522 BPGR Mod. Kgdms. Christ's Kgdm.
Johann Oecolampadius 1530 BPGR Kgdm. of God
Philipp Melanchthon 1543 BPGR Mod. Kgdms. Messian Kgdm.
Georg Joye 1545 [BPG]R Divisions Everlasting
Hugh Latimer 1553 BPGR Divisions
Virgil Solis 1560 BPGR
Anglican Formulas c. 1563 Future Kgdm.
Nikolaus Selnecker 1579 BPGR
Thomas Brightman 1614 [BPG]R
Biblical Expositors of the Post-Reformation Era—Europe: 1600-1800 AD[75]
4 metals Stone Kgdm
George Downham 1603 [BPG]R Kgdm. of Chr.
Hugh Broughton 1607 BPG-Alex. Succ.
Joseph Mede 1631 BPGR Kgdm. of Chr.
John Tillinghast 1655 BPGR Kgdm. of Chr.
Henry More 1664 [BPG]R
William Sherwin 1670 [BPG]R Kgdm. of Chr.
Thomas Beverly 1684 [BPGR] Kgdm. of Chr.
Pierre Jurieu 1687 BPGR Kgdm. of Chr.
Johannes Cocceius 1701 BPGR
Heinrich Horch 1712 BPGR Kgdm. of Chr.
Matthew Henry 1714 BPGR Kgdm. of Chr.
Sir Isaac Newton 1727 BPGR Kgdm. of Chr.
John Willison 1745 [BPGR] Kgdm. of Chr.
Thomas Newton 1754 BPGR Kgdm. of Chr.
Hans Wood 1787 [BPGR] Kgdm. of Chr.
Christian G. Thube 1789 BPGR Kgdm. of Chr.
James Ebenezer Bicheno 1793 BPGR
Edward King 1798 [BPGR]
Jean G. de la Flechere 1800 BPGR
Biblical Expositors of the Post-Reformation Era—America: 1600-1800 AD[76]
4 metals Feet/Toes Stone Kgdm.
Anne Bradstreet 1642 BPGR Future
Ephriam Huit 1644 BPGR Church-State Christ's Kgdm.
Thomas Parker 1646 BPGR Intermarriage Kgdm. of Saints
John Davenport 1653 BPGR Christ
Samuel Hutchinson 1667 BPGR 2nd Advent
Increase Mather 1669 BPGR Not Yet
Nicholas Noyes 1698 BPGR God's Kgdm.
Cotton Mather 1702 BPGR God.s Kgdm.
William Burnet 1724 Div. Europe Christ's Kgdm.
Paul Dudley 1731 BPGR
Jonathan Edwards 1739 BPGR 10 Kgdms.
David Imri 1756 BPGR
Ezekiel Cheever 1757 BPGR Christ's Kgdm.
Samuel Gatchel 1781 [BPGR]
Benjamin Gale 1788 BPGR Church-State God's Kgdm.
Samuel Hopkins 1793 God's Kgdm.
Samuel Osgood 1794 BPGR Present 2nd Advent
David Austin 1794 BPGR Church-State Soon
Joshua Spalding 1796 BPGR Christ's Kgdm.
Biblical Expositors of the 19th Century Advent Awakening: 1800-1845 AD[77]
4 metals Feet/Toes Stone Kgdm.
Manuel Lacunza 1799 4 Kgdms. Divided Europe Christ's Kgdm.
William Hales 1803 BPGR Christ's Kgdm.
George Stanley Faber 1804 BPGR 10 Divisions
Thomas Scott 1805 BPGR Secular w/Eccl God's Kgdm.
Adam Clarke 1810 BPGR Divisions God's Kgdm.
Samuel Toovey 1813 BPGR God's Kgdm.
Captain Maitland 1813 BPGR 10 Divisions
William Cuninghame 1813 BPGR
James H Frere 1815 BPGR 10 Divisions God's Kgdm.
Lewis Way 1818 BPGR Divided Kgdms Christ's Kgdm.
Francis Mason (archdeacon) 1820 BPGR God's Kgdm.
Jonathan Bayford 1820 BPGR Divided Europe Messiah's Kgdm.
Joseph Wolff 1822 BPGR Christ's Kgdm.
John Fry 1822 BPGR Divisions
Edward Cooper 1825 BPGR God's Kgdm.
S. R. Maitland 1826 BPGR Future Future
Edward Irving 1826 BPGR God's Kgdm.
Edward T. Vaughan 1828 BPGR Christ's Kgdm.
Thomas Keyworth 1828 BPGR 10 Kgdms.
Gerald T. Noel 1828 BPGR 10 Divisions God's Kgdm.
Alexander Keith 1828 BPGR
Alfred Addis 1829 BPGR Divided Europe God's Kgdm.
Jonathon Hooper 1829 BPGR Western Kgdms. God's Kgdm.
William W. Pym 1829 BPGR God's Kgdm.
Henry Drummond (1786–1860) 1830 BPGR
William Jones 1830 BPGR Divisions
Edward N. Hoare 1830 BPGR 10 Kgdms. 2nd Advent
Samuel Lee (linguist) 1830 Preterist
William Anderson 1830 BPGR Christ's Kgdm.
James Begg 1831 BPGR Intermarriages God's Kgdm.
William Digby 1831 BPGR
William Thorp 1831 BPGR
John Cox 1832 BPGR Christ's Kgdm.
Joseph d'A. Sirr 1833 BPGR Divisions God's Kgdm.
Matthew Habershon 1834 BPGR Christ's Kgdm.
Bp Dan Wilson 1836 BPGR Christ's Kgdm.
Edward Bickersteth 1836 BPGR
François Samuel Robert Louis Gaussen 1837 BPGR Church-State Christ's Kgdm.
J. H. Richter 1839 BPGR Listed Christ's Kgdm.
James Henthorn Todd 1840 Futurist
John Henry Newman 1841 Futurist
Thomas Rawson Birks 1843 BPGR Mingle
Jonathan Cumming 1843 BPGR
William Miller 1843 BPGR Divided Europe God's Kgdm.
E. B. Elliot 1844 BPGR Christ's Kgdm.
James A. Wylie 1844 BPGR Divided Europe God's Kgdm.
Joseph Baylee 1845 BPGR Divided Europe Christ's Kgdm.

Footnotes

  1. ^ Prinsloo, G.T.M. (1993). Two Poems in a Sea of Prose: The Context and Content of Daniel 2.20-23 and 6.27-28. Sheffield: JSOT Press. p. 99. {{cite book}}: More than one of |author= and |last= specified (help)
  2. ^ J. G. Baldwin, "Book of Daniel" in New Bible Dictionary3rd edition, IVP
  3. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1255, footnote 2.1-12
  4. ^ a b c Longman & Garland 2009, p. 57 Cite error: The named reference "Longman, 57" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  5. ^ editor, Danna Nolan Fewell, (1992). Reading between texts : intertextuality and the Hebrew Bible (1st ed. ed.). Louisville, Ky.: Westminster/John Knox Press. p. 62. ISBN 978-0-664-25393-6. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help); |last= has generic name (help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  6. ^ Goldingay 1989, p. 44
  7. ^ Seow, C.L. (2003). Daniel (1st ed. ed.). Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press. p. 37. ISBN 0-664-25675-9. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)
  8. ^ The Times of Daniel, by George Duke of Manchester, 1845 p. 96.
  9. ^ Daniel: Absolutes in a Gray World, 2009 p.131
  10. ^ Goldingay 1989, p. 36
  11. ^ Longman & Garland 2009, p. 58
  12. ^ Redditt, Paul L. (1999). Daniel : based on the New Revised Standard Version. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. p. 50. ISBN 978-1-84127-009-8.
  13. ^ Collins 1984, pp. 46–7
  14. ^ a b Collins 1984, p. 47
  15. ^ a b c d e Collins 1984, p. 48
  16. ^ Collins 1984, pp. 48–9
  17. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1255, footnote 2.5
  18. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1255, footnote 2.1
  19. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1256, footnote 2.12
  20. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1256, footnote 2.14
  21. ^ a b Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1256, footnote 2.16
  22. ^ Note: The companions were first introduced in Daniel 1:6-7 – Oxford annotated Bible. 2007. p. 1256, See footnote 2.17.
  23. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1256, footnote 2.18
  24. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1256, footnote 2.19
  25. ^ Psalms 36:9, 41:13, 106:48, 139:11-12
  26. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1256, footnote 2.20-23
  27. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1256, footnote 2.21
  28. ^ Porteous, Norman W. (1965). Daniel : a commentary (null ed.). Philadelphia: Westminster Press. p. 45-6. ISBN 978-0-664-22317-5.
  29. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1257, footnote 2.32-33
  30. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1257, footnote 2.33
  31. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1258, footnote 2.46
  32. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1258, footnote 2.47
  33. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1258, footnote 2.48
  34. ^ Oxford annotated Bible 2007, p. 1258, footnote 2.49
  35. ^ a b Mangano, Mark (2001). Esther & Daniel (null ed.). Joplin, Mo.: College Press Pub. p. 188. ISBN 0-89900-885-2.
  36. ^ Phillips, John (2004). Exploring the book of Daniel : an expository commentary (null ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications. p. 53. ISBN 0-8254-3399-1.
  37. ^ Jeremiah, David (2008). "3. Modern Europe...Ancient Rome". What in the world is going on? : 10 prophetic clues you cannot afford to ignore (null ed.). Nashville, Tenn.: Thomas Nelson. ISBN 0-7852-2887-X.
  38. ^ Mangano, Mark (2001). College Press Pub. p. 323. {{cite book}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  39. ^ Mangano, Mark (2001). College Press Pub. pp. 187–8. {{cite book}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  40. ^ a b Walvoord, John (2010). "11: World History in Prophetic Outline". Major Bible Prophecies: 37 Crucial Prophecies That Affect You Today. Zondervan. ISBN 0-310-87311-8. {{cite book}}: More than one of |author= and |last= specified (help)
  41. ^ Phillips, John (2004). Exploring the book of Daniel : an expository commentary (null ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications. pp. 53–4. ISBN 0-8254-3399-1.
  42. ^ Baldwin, Joyce G. (2009). Daniel : an introduction and commentary (null ed.). Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic. p. 93. ISBN 0-8308-4223-3.
  43. ^ Froom, Le Roy Edwin, 1948, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, 4 Volumes, Review and Herald Publishing Association. Pp. 4000+/-
  44. ^ Froom 1948, p. 243
  45. ^ Froom 1948, pp. 244, 245
  46. ^ E. J. Young, The Messianic Prophecies of Daniel, 1952.
  47. ^ Pfandl, Gerhard 2004, Daniel, the Seer of Babylon, Review and Herald Publishing Association. p. 59.
  48. ^ Mears, Henrietta (1999). What the Bible is all about (null ed.). Ventura, Calif.: Regal Books. p. 174. ISBN 0-8307-4329-4.
  49. ^ Smith, U., 1944, Daniel and Revelation, Southern Publishing Association, Nashvill, TN
  50. ^ Anderson, A., 1975, Pacific PRess Pub. Assoc., Unfolding Daniel's Prophecies, Mountain View, CA
  51. ^ Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy! published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society
  52. ^ The Stone Cut Without Hands, Spencer Kimball, Ensign, May 1976
  53. ^ Daniel Among the Babylonians
  54. ^ Miller, Stephen R. (1994). Daniel (null ed.). Nashville, Tenn.: Broadman & Holman. p. 94. ISBN 978-0-8054-0118-9.
  55. ^ Miller, Stephen R. (1994). Daniel (null ed.). Nashville, Tenn.: Broadman & Holman. pp. 173–4. ISBN 978-0-8054-0118-9.
  56. ^ Porteous, Norman W. (1965). Westminster Press. p. 48. {{cite book}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  57. ^ The apocalyptic imagination: an introduction to Jewish apocalyptic literature, John Joseph Collins, p. 95
  58. ^ H. H. Rowley, Darius the Mede and the Four World empires in the Book of Daniel, 1935
  59. ^ a b Ernest C. Lucas, Daniel, Apollos Old Testament Commentary
  60. ^ J. H. Walton, "The Four Kingdoms of Daniel," JETS 29(1986):25-36.
  61. ^ Collins, Daniel, p. 170
  62. ^ Cf. H. H. Rowley: Darius the Mede and the Four World Empires, pp. 96
  63. ^ Hartmann and DiLella, The Book of Daniel, p. 148
  64. ^ Dillard and Longman, An Introduction to the Old Testament, Apollos 1995, pp. 329-350.
  65. ^ Ronald Wallace (1979). The Message of Daniel. IVP. pp. 17–19, 58.
  66. ^ H. H. Rowley (1935). Darius the Mede and the Four World empires in the Book of Daniel. p. 97.
  67. ^ Craig Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels, Apollos 1997, pp.322-326
  68. ^ N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, Fortress 1996, p. 348ff.
  69. ^ Reginald H. Fuller (1988). James L Mays (ed.). Harper's Bible Commentary. p. 977.
  70. ^ Ronald Wallace (1979). The Message of Daniel. IVP. p. 58.
  71. ^ VanderKam 2002, p. 423
  72. ^ After table in Froom 1950, pp. 456–7
  73. ^ After table in Froom 1950, pp. 894–5
  74. ^ After table in Froom 1948, pp. 528–9
  75. ^ After table in Froom 1948, pp. 784–5
  76. ^ After table in Froom 1946, pp. 252–3
  77. ^ After table in Froom 1946, pp. 744–5

References

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Daniel_2&oldid=526636417"