Daniel 7 (Translation Consultant Notes Preliminary S.Kempf)
Steve KempfRelated papers
The Two Later Visions of Daniel: Historically Explained Chapters 8 - 12 - Thomas Rawson Birks - This work is Exhaustive with Footnotes as long as some pages - Covers Daniel and Pagan history( Greek to Egytian and Syrian in a unique , deep historical way - Almost impossible to find Jewel of a book!
Seeley, Service British publishing company , 1846
After the fall of Babylon, the overthrow of Persia, and the division and decay of the Macedonian empire, Rome, the last of these great kingdoms, obtained the supreme power, and held it in unbrokenstrength for nearly five hundred years. Then, as the visions had foreshewn, it was broken, and ten smaller kingdoms arose in its peculiar territory, the western countries of Europe. It was further announced that a power would arise among these divided kingdoms, small in size, but vast in its claims, assume the prophetic character, usurp authority over the whole dempire, and persecute the servants of God. The Roman Papacy has fulfilled all these features of the prediction, and has thus lent us a fresh proof of the Divine fore- knowledge. But now, for three hundred years, this power, once irresistible, has begun to decay. It may still revive for a moment, and struggle for the victory ; but the judgment is set, and has begun to take away its dominion, to consume and destroy it unto the end. We are now living in the pause before this last conflict, which the kingdoms of the West will shortly undergo, and which, amidst tumult, strife and suffering, will bring on the dawn of the millennial glory. The Son of Man, as here announced, will then appear in the clouds of heaven. His universal empire will be established, and the saints of the Most High will take the kingdom, and possess it for ever and ever. We are now drawing near to this eventful crisis, which will end the Fourth Empire, and usher in the kingdom of the Messiah in its manifested power and triumph. With such a prospect before us, it is our duty to gain all the light which the word of God supplies, that we may understand the present duty, and the future hopes, of the Church of Christ. The other prophecies are all given for this end. But especially the two later visions, in the eighth and eleventh of Daniel, fill up more completely the outline which was revealed in his earlier prophecies. The first vision, that of the Great Image, had been given to Nebuchadnezzar himself, in the beginning of his reign ; and it was expounded by Daniel when he was only a youth, in his exile at the court of Babylon. Fifty years almost had passed before any further reve- lation was given to the holy prophet. But when the monarchy of Babylon had begun to decay, and Daniel himself had experienced the fickleness of royal favour, the vision of the Four Beasts, in the first year of Belshazzar, enlarged and confirmed the previous message. Two j'-ears later a further vision was added, to unfold more fully the course of the second and third empire and the events of Eastern history, in connexion with the temple and the people of Israel. The prophecy of the Seventy Weelj s, fifteen years afterward, revealed the times of Messiah's first Advent, and his rejection by his own people. Last of all, after four years, a fuller ac- count was given of the trials and conflicts through which the Jews would pass, under the Syrian and Egyptian kings ; with a brief history of later events, that would be fulfilled in the time of the end, and issue in the gathering of Israel, and the resurrection of those who are sleeping in the dust. The two visions which occupy the eighth and ele- venth chapters, like the visions of the Great Image, and of the Four Beasts, have a close and evident connexion with each other. On this account it seems better to combine them in the historical exposition. There are many interesting truths, which are suggested by each of them, rich with instruction to the Church of God. But since, from the extent and fulness of the last vision, the history alone will require considerable space, it seems better to refrain at present from a wider range of discussion. My object, then, will be to unfold the ac- tual fulfilment of these two prophecies, chiefly from the original authorities, and to intermix no collateral topics, but those which seem essential to the main object of the work. These will be introduced amidst the histori- cal chapters, where they seem required by the course of the exposition. A Special message from the Author of this great deep Biblical book of old - May it please Him, who is the Fountain of-all wisdom, and who has given the word of prophecy to be a light to our steps amidst the darkness of the world, to bless this effort to unfold one part of His holy oracles, and to make it effectual, in its own measure, for the instruction and comfort of His people^ and their preparation for His blessed and eternal kingdom ! Eschatology: The later chapters of Daniel, particularly chapters 8-12, contain significant eschatological themes. Eschatology deals with the study of the "end times" or the final events in human history according to divine revelation. Daniel's visions and prophecies include references to the rise and fall of kingdoms, the persecution of God's people, the coming of the Messiah, the resurrection of the dead, and the final judgment. These eschatological themes have had a profound impact on Jewish and Christian beliefs about the future, shaping theological understandings of salvation, redemption, and the ultimate destiny of humanity. Below are some notes I added for better insight and understanding for this great Book of Daniel of old ! Historical Context: Scholars interpret the historical context of Daniel's prophecies in various ways. Some see them as referring primarily to events contemporary to Daniel's time, such as the rise and fall of empires like Babylon, Media, Persia, Greece, and Rome. Others view certain prophecies as having a dual fulfillment, with historical events serving as foreshadows of future events, including those related to the coming of Jesus Christ and the end times. For example, the prophecies in Daniel 7-12 may have initial fulfillments in the struggles between the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires and the persecution of the Jewish people under Antiochus IV Epiphanes during the Maccabean period. However, they may also point to broader eschatological realities yet to be fulfilled. Divine Plan for Humanity: The Book of Daniel reveals God's sovereignty over human history and His overarching plan for humanity's redemption and restoration. Despite the rise and fall of empires and the persecution faced by God's people, Daniel's visions affirm that God remains in control of world events and will ultimately bring about justice and deliverance for His people. The visions of Daniel also emphasize the importance of faithfulness and trust in God, even in the midst of adversity and uncertainty. The example of Daniel and his companions serves as a model of unwavering faith and obedience in the face of opposition. In summary, the later chapters of Daniel offer profound insights into eschatology, Israelite history, and the divine plan for humanity. Through visions, prophecies, and historical narratives, the book conveys themes of God's sovereignty, redemption, and the ultimate fulfillment of His purposes in the world. These insights have had a lasting impact on Jewish and Christian theology, shaping beliefs about the future and the role of God in human affairs. Other helpful notes for your viewing pleasure I also added below - Chapter 8: The Vision of the Ram and the Goat • In chapter 8, Daniel sees a vision of a ram and a goat. The ram has two horns, representing the Medo-Persian Empire, while the goat with a single prominent horn represents Greece under Alexander the Great. • The goat defeats the ram, symbolizing the conquest of the Persian Empire by Alexander. • The large horn of the goat is broken, and four smaller horns emerge, representing the division of Alexander's empire among his generals after his death. Chapter 9: Daniel's Prayer and the Seventy Weeks • Chapter 9 begins with Daniel's prayer of confession and intercession on behalf of his people, acknowledging their sins and pleading for God's mercy and restoration of Jerusalem. • The angel Gabriel appears to Daniel and provides him with a prophecy known as the "seventy weeks." This prophecy outlines a period of seventy weeks (interpreted by many as seventy weeks of years) that will culminate in the coming of the Messiah. • The seventy weeks are divided into three segments: seven weeks, sixty-two weeks, and one week. The final week is often interpreted as a reference to the ministry of Jesus Christ. Chapter 10-12: Daniel's Final Visions • Chapters 10-12 contain a series of visions and revelations given to Daniel concerning the future of Israel and the world. • In chapter 10, Daniel receives a vision of a heavenly being who strengthens and encourages him. The angelic being provides insights into future events, including the rise of Persia, Greece, and conflicts in the region. • Chapter 11 provides a detailed prophecy of conflicts between the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires, with a focus on the persecution of the Jewish people by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. • Chapter 12 concludes the book with further prophecies about the end times, including the resurrection of the dead and the final judgment. Scholarly Perspectives: • Scholars approach the Book of Daniel with various interpretive methods, including historical-critical analysis, literary criticism, and theological exegesis. • Many scholars view the visions in Daniel as reflecting historical events leading up to the time of the Maccabean Revolt in the second century BCE, as well as apocalyptic themes related to the end times. • The book's blend of historical narrative, prophecy, and symbolism makes it a complex and challenging text to interpret, leading to a wide range of scholarly perspectives and debates.
The Book of Daniel, An Analysis
The Book of Daniel, An Analysis, 2013
The Book of Daniel is a companion to the Book of Revelation. The following is an overview of the book. Daniel, the author, like Ezekiel, was a captive in Babylon. He was brought before King Nebuchadnezzar while young, and trained in the Chaldean language and sciences. His career resembled that of Joseph. He was promoted to the highest office in the realm. He maintained his spiritual life in the midst of a heathen court. The main theme of the Book is the Sovereignty of God over the affairs of men in all ages. The pagan king’s confessions of this fact constitute the Key Verses of this book. Section I is largely a narrative of personal biography and local history. It contains an account of thrilling events and divine interpositions unsurpassed in the Old Testament. It refers to six moral conflicts in which Daniel and his companions participated. The first conflict is between pagan self-indulgence and conscientious abstinence, in promoting health. We find in chapter one that abstinence wins. The second conflict is between pagan magic and heavenly wisdom in the interpretation of dreams. We find in chapter two that divine wisdoms wins. The third conflict is heathen idolatry arrayed against loyalty to God. In chapter three we find that loyalty to God wins. The fourth conflict is a pagan king’s pride arrayed against Divine Sovereignty. We find in chapter four that God wins and the king is turned out to eat grass. The fifth conflict is impious sacrilege arrayed against reverence for sacred objects. In chapter five we find that reverence wins. We also find the handwriting on the wall and Belshazzar being dethroned. The sixth conflict is between malicious plotting and the providence of God over His saints. In chapter six we find that providence wins with the lions’ mouths being stopped. Section II gives us the visions and prophecies relating to the controlling hand of God moving the scenes in the Panorama of History, chapters 7-12. The Book of Daniel is a companion to the Book of Revelation. Both of these books contain much imagery which appears mysterious. The attempt to fit the the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation into the facts and events of human history has usually produced an endless conflict of opinions. The reason for this is that the true interpretation of the details of the visions is not always clear. There are two facts that are generally acknowledged by most scholars: (1) That the prophecies represent a partly veiled Revelation of Future Events in secular and sacred history. (2) That the visions point to the ultimate triumph of God’s Kingdom over all Satanic and World Powers. In chapter seven, many commentators see the Four Beasts as representing the Four great Empires, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome, followed by a vision of the coming Messiah. In chapter eight, another period of Medo-Persian and Grecian history appears under the figure of a beast. In chapter nine we find Daniel’s prayer and a veiled prophecy of the time of the coming of the Messiah. Chapters ten to twelve contain additional far-reaching predictions and revelations of future events. These three chapters have been the battleground of theological controversy with many varied interpretations. (Adapted from Thompson’s Chain Reference).
TRANSLATION CONSULTANT NOTES ON THE BOOK OF DANIEL
Daniel 7:1-28
Preliminary Draft
September, 2020
Steve Kempf
Consultant Notes on Daniel
2
Section 7:1-28 A vision of four world kingdoms followed by the kingdom of God
Historical Setting of Daniel 7:
The visions in Daniel 7-12 occurred at different times during the events described in the first six chapters.
The account in Daniel 6 ended during the reign of Darius the Mede (sometime after 538 B.C.) The
vision recorded in Daniel 7 occurred sometime before that during the first year that Belshazzar reigned in
Babylon (approximately 550-549 B.C.). 1
Beltshazzar reigned as coregent with his father Nabonidus. Apparently, Nabonidus was not well liked in
Babylon because of his devotion to the god Sin instead of the god Marduk, the patron god of Babylon.
Because of his unpopularity, Nabonidus voluntarily went into exile in the town of Tema in the Arabian
Desert. He left his son Beltshazzar to reign in his place until the empire was conquered by Cyrus..
If Daniel received the vision of Daniel 7 in 550 B.C., this would have been the same year that Cyrus the
Persian became ruler of the Medo-Persian Empire. 2 Cyrus later conquered Babylon in 539 B.C. Thus at
the time of the vision, the Medo-Persian empire would have been the second world kingdom described in
Daniel 2 and 7.
Genre:
The first six chapters of Daniel tell what happened to Daniel and his three friends during their time of
their exile in Babylon. These stories were written, for the most part, in narrative form. The author
describes the action from a third person viewpoint. These six chapters emphasize that “dominion”
belongs to God and he gives it to the rulers he chooses. They also establish that Daniel had the gift of
interpreting dreams and visions and that he could be trusted to interpret visions that describe events that
in the more distant future.
The last six chapters of Daniel, describe the mysterious visions that Daniel saw when he lived in
Babylon. These visions do not follow in chronological order from the events of the first six chapters. In
fact, the visions of chapters 7 and 8 occur before the events recorded in Daniel 5 and 6. These visions
also differ from the accounts of Daniel 1-6 in that they are recorded in the first person. Daniel describes
what he sees in figurative language and unusual images. What happens in the visions is different than
the way things normally happen in real life. They are difficult to understand. 3 There are strange
animals, mysterious symbols, and unusual numbers.
Many of the images come from common images
in the Near East at the time that Daniel wrote. They would have been familiar to the people at that time.
They would have caused very strong feelings and emotions in the original readers. The author intended
to communicate a certain amount of mystery and in some cases ambiguity. The purpose of these visions
was to show Daniel what would happen in the future to his people until the time when God would
establish kingdom on earth. How are we supposed to understand this strange world? How are we to
translate these visions? We must begin with understanding the kind of literature, that Daniel was
writing.
This kind of literature or genre is often called “apocalyptic.” 4 The word “apocalypse” comes from the
Greek word that is the title of the last book of the New Testament. In fact, the first verse of Revelation
directly alludes to Daniel 2:28-30, 45. 5 God is the one who reveals secrets. In fact in many ways Daniel
7-12 is similar to the book of Revelation. Both books describe God’s ultimate victory in the future over
his enemies. Both books describe the end of evil and the defeat of the spiritual forces that oppress God’s
people on earth.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
Apocalyptic literature has a number of common characteristics.
them: 6
3
Peter Gentry gives a nice summary of
•
Narrative framework: Apocalyptic normally has a narrative framework. This means that the
contents, no matter how weird, are given in the form and framework of a story.
•
Shematization of history. Frequently, the narrative provides a schematization of history. In other
words, the course of human history is arranged into periods.
•
Given by heavenly messenger. The revelation is mediated by an angel or heavenly messenger to a
human recipient, usually a prophet or seer. We see this in Daniel, Zechariah, and Revelation.
•
God’s-eye view of history. Since apocalyptic involves God revealing secrets, it provides a God’s–
eye view of human history.
•
Colorful metaphors and symbols
•
Future hope in present trouble. The revelation almost always has to do with future deliverance
and salvation. It is given in crisis, in difficult times, normally when the people of God are called
to endure a period of suffering. The apocalypse…seeks to …comfort and encourage his people to
appropriate behavior as they await final rescue.
To this list we might also add the following common features:
•
The visions describe the horror of human evil. In particular, the author describes evil as
having become institutionalized in governments.
•
The visions describe a battle between powerful spiritual forces in the universe.
relates this spiritual battle to conflict that occurs here on earth.
•
The visions tell that God will eventually judge those who oppose him and those who oppress
his people.
•
The visions predict that God will deliver his people at a fixed time.
•
The visions also affirm that God’s people will experience victory. They will ultimately
experience resurrection and new life.
The author
Apocalyptic writing is similar to prophetic writing. Both kinds of literature have to do with the future.
However there are also differences. In prophecy, God spoke directly to the prophet who delivered his
message orally to the people. Only later did the prophet or one of his servants record the prophetic
message. In Apocalyptic literature, God does not speak directly to a person. He communicated through a
vision or by means of an angel. Daniel did not communicate his message orally. He recorded the
message on a scroll and then sealed it for a later time. 7
The book of Daniel is unique in the Old Testament. It is like the prophetic books, but it is also different.
Daniel is similar to some of the wisdom books, but it is different from them in many ways too. It begins
with historical narrative and gradually changes to focus on the future. In many ways the apocalyptic
worldview will be different from the cultural world view in which you are translating. 8 In the notes that
follow, you will learn more about this world view and the unique way Daniel wrote.
Literary Structure:
The literary structure of biblical Hebrew is one of the primary keys to interpreting the meaning of a text.
This is especially true about Apocalyptic literature. In order to understand Daniel 7, we need to look
carefully at the discourse structure of Daniel as a literary whole..
Consultant Notes on Daniel
4
The following outline has been adapted from Peter Gentry in Kingdom Through Covenant, 1st edition and
2nd editions. 9 The structure shows how the two linguistic parts of the book (Aramaic and Hebrew)
interlock and combine to present a unity of thought. In particular, the outline shows how the discourse
follows the common Hebrew literary technique of introducing a subject and then repeating that subject
from a different perspective. Notice, in particular, how chapter 7 functions to link the two parts of the
book together.
a.
Introduction: (1:1-21)
b
A dream of four world kingdoms, followed by the kingdom of God (2:1-49)
c Deliverance of the faithful from the fiery furnace (3:1-30)
d Humbling of proud king Nebuchadnezzar (4:1-37)
d’ Humbling of proud king Belshazzar (5:1-31)
c’
b’
Deliverance of the faithful from the lion’s den (6:1-28)
A vision of the four world kingdoms, followed by the kingdom of God (7:1-28)
e
Further details of the second and third world kingdoms (8:1-27)
f
A vision concerning the fourth and fifth world kingdoms: the seventy weeks, the
coming prince and the city of Jerusalem (9:1-27)
e’ Further details of the third, fourth and fifth world kingdoms (10:1-12:4)
a’ Conclusion: (12:5-13)
Notice that the chiastic structure shows that Daniel 2 and 7 present the same message but in different but
complementary ways. Daniel 2 presents the image of a gigantic statue. It has a head of gold, a chest
and arms of silver, a belly and thighs of bronze, and legs of iron. Its feet are made of iron and clay mixed
together. The giant image was made by human hands. The image represents four successive human
kingdoms that will one day rule on earth. However, the image will not endure. It will be destroyed by
a stone that is cut without human hands from a mountain. This stone will eventually grow and become a
mountain that will fill the entire earth. This mountain describes a fifth kingdom, the kingdom of God,
which will last forever.
Daniel 7 presents a parallel and complementary vision to the one in Daniel 2. Daniel 7 expands on king
Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Daniel 2 by using different images, and in doing so, adds details about each
of the four kingdoms. Daniel 7 presents the four kingdoms in terms of four animals who are wild,
ferocious and cruel. The last beast stands out as the strangest and most powerful. It speaks boastful and
blasphemous things. Then abruptly there is a change of scene. The reader now sees a picture of
heaven’s court where one who is like a son of man is given a kingdom. The “son of man” parallels the
rock in Daniel 2. . In this last scene, the heavenly court will sit in judgment and the “son of man” will be
given an eternal kingdom, and all people will serve and obey him.
The dream in Daniel 2 gives the reader an earthly perspective of the four kingdoms. The gigantic image
is presented in a more favorable light. It appeals to the king Nebuchadnezzar’s nature and makes him
more receptive to Daniel’s interpretation of the dream. The vision in Daniel 7 offers a heavenly
perspective, but it is presented in a more sinister light. 10 It is more alarming. Like chapter 2, Daniel 7
predicts four successive human kingdoms followed by the kingdom of God. However, the kingdoms are
cruel and violent. These are kingdoms under which God’s people will have to suffer. At the same time,
however, Daniel 7 offers greater comfort and hope than the dream in Daniel 2. It presents a coming
personal Messiah and an eternal kingdom that God will set up for his people. 11 The vision in Daniel 7
Consultant Notes on Daniel
5
also gives greater emphasis on distant future. 12 It alludes to both the first and second advents of Christ. It
parallels Revelation 19-20, where there is a final judgment at the end of the world after Christ’s return.
In summary, the dream of Daniel 7 presents the same message as the dream in Daniel 2 but in a
different and enhanced way. 13
Each vision that succeeds Daniel 7 in the rest of the book is an expansion of the central vision found in
chapters 2 and 7. Each vision provides greater detail of the same scene. The vision of chapter 8 expands
on the second and third kingdoms. The vision of Daniel 9 expands on the fourth kingdom and the
kingdom of God. The vision of Daniel 10-12 gives even greater detail about the four kingdoms, although
it focuses largely on the third kingdom (11:3-35) followed by a short section on the fourth kingdom
(11:36-45) and the kingdom of God (12:1-4). 14 As Peter Gentry explains, the literary structure of
successive visions allow the reader to “zoom in” on the details that have been only presented previously
in a general way. 15
Interpretation:
Scholars have debated the meaning of the four beasts for centuries. 16 The following is a summary of the
main views.
As noted above, the dream in Daniel 7 is parallel to Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Daniel 2. Daniel 7
presents the same meaning with different images. In fact, the vision in Daniel 7 presents the reader with
an enhanced picture of the image in Daniel 2. It is a different perspective of the same meaning, only with
greater detail.
In Daniel 2:38, Daniel told Nebuchadnezzar that he was the head of gold and that his kingdom was the
first of the four kingdoms in the dream. As a result, most scholars conclude that the first beast in Daniel 7
represents Nebuchadnezzar and his kingdom of Babylon. There are elements of the vision in Daniel 7
that seem to refer to Nebuchadnezzar as well. 17
The second beast was like a hungry bear. He lay on its side with three ribs in its mouth. 18 From chapter
six, we know that the kingdom that followed Babylon was the kingdom of the Medes and Persians (6:8).
Many scholars think that the second beast represents this new combined kingdom. 19 Other scholars think
that the second beast represented only the Medes. 20 Some scholars think that Daniel did not intend a
specific kingdom. 21
The third beast is portrayed as a leopard which had four heads and which had four wings on its back. 22
The image describes a beast that was very quick and ferocious. Many scholars think that this beast is the
kingdom of Greece. 23 Others think that it refers to Persia.24 Finally, some scholars do not think it is
possible to identify this beast in history. 25
The fourth beast was different from the first three. It was also the most dangerous. It had great iron teeth
and bronze claws (7:19). Later ten horns sprouted from its head. This fourth image is similar to the
fourth kingdom in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Daniel 2. The beast’s iron teeth correspond to the iron
metal of the feet of the statue. Scholars interpret this image in different ways. Many scholars think the
fourth beast represents the Roman empire or a revived or restored Roman empire. 26 Those who follow
this view think the little horn represents the Antichrist of the New Testament. Other scholars think the
fourth beast represents Greece.27 For those who follow this view, the little horn represents a wicked
king who oppressed the Jews from 168-165 B.C. Still others think the fourth beast is a completely
different kind of kingdom compared to the first three. They consider it a spiritual kingdom, whose leader
is not a man but Satan himself. 28
There are also different views of the fifth kingdom, kingdom of God. Some scholars interpret the
kingdom of God begins at the first coming of Christ. Others believe the Kingdom of God begins at the
second coming of Christ.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
6
Apocalyptic writing is mysterious and often obscure. This is one reason why scholars differ in the way
they interpret it. The translator should translate the images as literally as possible. You should also be
careful not to use paragraph headings that identify the symbols of the four beasts as the NASB does. It is
important not to impose one’s own interpretation onto the translation. The general goal of apocalyptic
writing is to give believers hope, especially for those who are enduring suffering or oppression.
Text: This is the last chapter that Daniel wrote in the Aramaic language. 29 When he wrote chapter 8 he
began to write in Hebrew again.
Outline: 30
1. Setting: (1-2a)
2. Daniel reported the vision (7:2-14) 31
3. An angel interpreted Daniel’s vision (7:15-27)
A. The angel explained the meaning of the four beasts (7:15-18)
B. The angel explained the meaning of small horn (7:19-27)
4. Conclusion: (7:28)
Headings:
The purpose of headings is to help readers follow the events of the story. Headings also help the reader
understand the relationships between the different parts of the story. You should decide how many
headings and what kind of headings you will need when you translate Daniel 7. Try not to use more
headings than are necessary.
English versions differ in the number of headings they use. Some versions give one heading for the
whole chapter: 32 For example:
7:1 - 28
Daniel’s Vision About Four Animals (GW)
7:1 - 28
Daniel’s visions (REB89)
Most versions give two headings to chapter seven. For example:
7: 1 - 14
15-28
7: 1 - 14
15-28
7: 1 - 14
15-28
7: 1 - 14
15-28
Daniel’s Dream of Four Beasts (NIV84)
The Interpretation of the Dream
The vision of the beasts, the One most venerable and the son of man (NJB)
The interpretation of the vision
Daniel’s Vision of Four Beasts (REB89)
The Vision is explained
Daniel’s Dream about the Four Animals (NCV)
The Meaning of the Dream
Some versions have three headings for chapter seven.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
7: 1 - 8
7
Visions of the Four Beasts (NRSV89)
9 -14 Judgment before the Ancient One
15-28
7: 1 - 8
Daniel’s Visions Interpreted
Daniel’s Vision of the Four Beasts (TEV)
9 -14 The Vision of the One Who Has Been Living Forever
15-28 The Visions are Explained
7: 1 - 8
9 -14
Daniel’s Vision of the Four Beasts (CEV95)
The Judgment
15-28 The Meaning of Daniel’s Vision
In some languages it will be important to write headings in full sentences.
Special Issues:
1. Key Terms: The following are some of the important key terms in Daniel 7: “vision,” “kingdom,”
“one like a son of man,” “Ancient of Days,” “saints,” and “the Most High.” The Notes will offer advice
on how to translate each of these key terms.
2. Numbers: Numbers are often used in a symbolic way in apocalyptic literature. This is true in Daniel.
For example, “the four winds of heaven” (7:3) refers to winds that come from every direction. The
phrases “a thousand thousands” and “ten thousand times ten thousand” (7:10) symbolize a very large
number of servants who served God. The expression “time, times and a half” symbolizes a period of
time when that the little horn would oppress God’s people. The Notes will offer help on how best to
translate these symbolic numbers.
3. Poetic speech: As in the other chapters of Daniel, the author liked to use poetic speech to emphasize
important themes. The poetic speech in 7:9-11 communicates the idea of order and beauty in the divine
court. This contrasts with the turbulence of the sea (7:2) and the appearance of the four beasts. 33 The
poetic speech in 7:13-14 is the climax of Daniel’s report about the vision. In many languages you will
want to indent these two sections or use a special format to indicate that these chapters are important.
Translate these poetic sections with the same format that you used elsewhere to present the poetic sections
in the book of Daniel. The Notes will suggest how you can best translate the parallel lines.
4. Symbolism: Apocalyptic literature often presents powerful images that people understood at the time
that the literature was written. For example, the turbulent waves of the sea symbolized chaos (7:2).34 The
white hair of the Ancient of Days symbolized wisdom (7:9). 35 His white clothing symbolized
righteousness. 36 The fire (7:9-10) represented the presence of God (heaven) and judgment. 37 A person
who comes on the clouds (7:13) symbolizes the appearance of deity. 38
These images may not
symbolize the same thing in your language and culture. The Notes will explain the meaning of each
image and offer ideas on how best to translate them.
5. Titles: Daniel used titles to describe some of the main characters in the vision: “Ancient of Days,”
“One like a son of man,” “the Most High” (7:25a) and a similar term that the RSV52 also translates “the
Most High” (7:18, 22, 25b, 27). Daniel described the Ancient of Days as an old and wise person who sat
Consultant Notes on Daniel
8
on a throne. This image symbolizes God in his role as judge. 39 Some scholars think that the title “One
like a son of man” is a symbol of the people of Israel. Others think it refers to an individual. There is a
close relationship given the association between a king and his people in previous chapters. At the
same time the title “one like a son of man” is a clear indication of humanity. 40 The phrase “coming on the
clouds” associated with the title is also a clear indication of deity.” This title will be discussed in more
detail in the notes. The New Testament identifies this person as Jesus Christ (Revelation 1:7; Mark
13:26).
The title “Most High” is used elsewhere in the book of Daniel to refer to God. However, Daniel used
another title in Aramaic that the RSV52 translates “Most High.” This title is less clear. It seems to refer
to another divine being. The Notes will discuss the meaning of these titles and give advice on how best to
translate them.
6. Repetition: The author liked to repeat information in Daniel 7. This kind repetition has two
functions. First, it can create suspense (as in 7:19-20). Secondly, it can give emphasis. For example, the
author repeats four times the fact that the little horn spoke boastfully (7:8, 11, 20, 25). The author repeats
that the little horn would oppress the saints (7:21, 25). These are important themes in this chapter. The
author also repeats that idea of divine judgment (7:11-12, 22, 26) and final victory (7:13-14, 22, 27). The
word “power” occurs seven times in Daniel 7 (vv. 12, 14, (3x), 26, 27 (2x)). The Notes will offer advice
on how best to translate information that the author repeats in the text.
7. The four beasts in Daniel 7 represent four kingdoms. However, the symbolism is more complex. In
Daniel 7:17 we learn that the four great beasts are also four kings. In Daniel 7:23 the fourth beast is a
fourth kingdom. Peter Gentry explains that the beast “can symbolize a kingdom or the ruler of that
kingdom at the same time.” 41 However, the symbolism is even more complex. In Daniel 10:12, 13, and
20 we learn that behind an earthly kingdom is an authority or heavenly power. This idea is also evident in
Daniel 7. Gentry explains that “the word power (dominion, ESV) occurs seven times in Daniel 7. In
verse 27 there is the plural powers. In this context, the plural form powers refers to spiritual beings who
exercise dominion and power. Gentry concludes that the image of the beasts in Daniel can represent, first
the spiritual power or prince in charge of a kingdom, secondly, the king who ruled over the kingdom, and
thirdly the people who lived or who were part of the kingdom. The same is true about the phrase “the son
of man.” In Daniel 7:18, 22, and 27 the saints are given the kingdom and power. However, in Daniel
7:14, the son of man is given the kingdom. The son of man and the saints are closely identified just as
there is a close connection between the king and his people. However, this does not exclude the
individuality of the son of man. Gentry notes that “his destiny is linked to the suffering people of God
and vice versa. It is a symbol for the heavenly leader as an individual as well as a corporate expression
for the saints who as the people of God will suffer persecution from the fourth beast at the end of time.
Allusions to Old Testament Images:
Scholars have noticed allusions in Daniel 2 and 7 from other O.T. passages. These allusions help us
understand more clearly the meaning of the images in the visions. For example, Nebuchadnezzer’s
dream is likened to the creation account.42 In Genesis 1 God makes humans in divine likeness in order
to rule over the world. In Daniel 2 human hands make a gigantic image to rule the world In Genesis 3,
humans in their arrogance strive to determine for themselves what is right and wrong. In Daniel 2,
human pride in riches and power is the root of the nations’ downfall. Finally, the image in Daniel 2 is
destroyed by a small stone which was cut out of a mountain but not by human hands.
This image
alludes to the account of David and Goliath, where David defeats Goliath with a small stone from a
brook. The allusion suggests that this rock is Davidic and his kingdom will grow into a mighty kingdom.
Daniel 7 also makes allusion to the creation account. This time instead of a gigantic human image, there
is a parody of creation. In Genesis 1 the Spirit of God blows over the waters and God creates light, land,
Consultant Notes on Daniel
9
plants and living creatures climaxing in the creation of humanity in the image of God. In Daniel 7 the
winds of heaven stir up a great sea. However, instead of God’s creation acts, one sees four savage beasts,
powerful, wild, ravenous and inhuman arising out of the chaotic waters. Gentry suggests that this is a
comparison of creation versus un-creation. 43
New Testament Use of Daniel:
Daniel is an important book to help us understand the New Testament. For example, the author of the
book of Revelation used many of the same images that are found in the book of Daniel. Other books of
the New Testament also refer to Daniel. In some translations, it may be useful to include footnotes to the
New Testament passages that refer to Daniel. For example, see the footnotes in the TEV. .
Although the book of Revelation was written in Greek, it follows the literary patterns of the Hebrew
prophets. In fact, it has been suggested that the book of Revelation has a literary structure like that of
Daniel. See the literary structure of the book of Revelation as analyzed by Andrew M. Fountain. 44 Peter
Gentry notes that like Daniel, there are sections in the book of Revelation that present an overview of
what will happen and there are sections that present expanded versions of the earlier overview.45
Consultant Notes on Daniel
•
Setting 7:1
Paragraph 7:1
7:1a
In the first year of Belshazzar king of
Babylon: This phrase explains when the
events in this chapter happened. 46
Daniel saw a vision during the first year
that Belshazzar reigned as king. 47 In
some languages you may have a special
way to show that these events happened
years before the events in the previous
chapter. Languages have different ways
to present this type of background
information. English versions translate
this in different ways:
-OREarlier, during the first year when
Belshazzar ruled the kingdom of
Babylonia
Translate this information in a way that is
natural to your language.
Belshazzar: The author referred to king
Belshazzar in Daniel 5. 48 The name
Belshazzar comes from the Akkadian
language and has the meaning, “Bel
protect the king.” 49 The name Bel was
another name for Marduk, the main god
of Babylon. The name Belshazzar is
similar to the name Nebuchadnezzar
gave to Daniel in 1:7. It is important to
spell the two names differently. 50
Babylon: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates Babylon is literally
“Babel.” English versions translate this
name differently:
•
Most versions translate this name
Babylon, the Greek name for the
capital city of the empire (RSV52,
NRSV52, KJV NCV, NLT96, GW,
NIV84, NJB, NJPS85).
Some English versions translate the
name “Babylonia,” the name of the
empire: (TEV, CEV95).
Both translations are correct. The name
Babylon was the political term for the
country that the king ruled. Check how
the national language translates this
name. King Belshazzar ruled the whole
country of Babylonia from the city of
Babylon.
7:1b
Daniel: English versions translate this name
in two ways:
•
Most versions use the third person,
just like the Aramaic:
Daniel (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
GW, NLT96, REB89
•
Some versions use the first person.
I (TEV, CEV95)
Previously, in the first year that
Belshazzar was king of Babylon
10
Translate in a way that is most natural in
your language.
had a dream The Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates had is literally, “saw.”
English versions translate this clause in
different ways:
saw a dream (NRSV89, NIV84,
NIV11, NLT07, Steinmann, Collins)
-OR-
had a dream. (ESVUS16, NCV,
Lucas, Goldingay)
-OR-
a dream … came to Daniel (REB89)
Use an expression that is natural in your
language to describe a person who sees a
dream.
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is .
In this
context, the connector introduces a
phrase that further explains the meaning
of the word “dream.” 51 English versions
translate this idea in different ways.
•
Most English versions have “and”
(KJV, RSV52, NRSV89, ESVUS16,
NLT96, NLT07, REB89, TEV,
CEV95, NJPS85, NIV84, NJB)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
•
Some English versions begin a new
clause.
He had a dream. He saw a vision…
(GW)
•
Some interpret the second phrase as
in apposition to the first:
A dream, a vision that came into his
head (Goldingay, similar Lucas)
•
Another possibility is to translate a
connector like “even.”
Translate the connection in a way that is
natural in your language. It is important
that the reader does not think that Daniel
saw a dream and a vision, as if they were
two different things. 52
visions of his head: See the Notes at 4:5a,
b. The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates visions is different from the
word the RSV52 translates dream. 53
However, in the book of Daniel the two
words often have the same meaning.
There are two ways that English versions
translate this:
•
Use one word. In this context, you
should use a word that is closest to
the meaning of the word vision. 54
Use two words
meanings):
Daniel probably saw the same vision or
parts of the same vision at different
times. See the Notes at 7:2, where the
text has the singular “vision.” Translate
this idea in a way that is most natural in
your language.
of his head: The same phrase was also
used to describe Nebuchadnezzar’s
dreams. See the Notes at 4:5b, 10, 13.
Other ways to translate this are:
passed through his mind (NIV84,
NIV11)
-OR-
came into his mind (Lucas)
In some languages the phrase of my head
may be implied by the word visions. If
that is true in your language you may
omit this phrase as the TEV, GW,
REB89, NLT96, NLT07, CEV95 do.
as he lay in his bed: In Daniel’s time,
people often explained where they were
when they had an important dream. See
for example the Notes at 2:28, 4:5b.
Some English versions add implied
information:
-OR-
(with
similar
dream and visions (KJV, RSV52,
NRSV89, NIV84, NJB, REB89
similarly NLT96)
The first option (1) is usually best.
Translate in a way that is most natural in
your language. The context implies that
these were not ordinary dreams. God
revealed information to Daniel that only
God could reveal.
visions: The Aramaic text has the plural
visions. English versions translate it in
different ways:
•
Translate the singular “vision” (GW,
NJPS85, Lucas, Goldingay) 55
while I was asleep (TEV, GW)
visions from God
•
•
11
Translate the plural visions like most
English versions (RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, NLT96, NLT07, REB89)
at night (TEV)
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
Comment on 7:1a: It is unclear whether the
king saw the dream on one specific night or
if he saw the same dream many times during
a longer period of time. Modern versions
differ:
(1) Daniel saw the dreams many times
during that year. 56
During the first year… Daniel had a
dream and …visions
(2) He saw the dream once that night
while I was asleep one night
(CEV95)
-OR-
in the night…that night (TEV)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
Interpretation (1) is probably best.
12
-OR-
This is the beginning
7:1c
Then: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates then introduces the
next event in the narrative. English
versions translate this connector in
different ways;
afterwards (NJPS85)
-OR-
then (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89, GW,
Lucas, Steinmann)
-OR-
No connector (Goldingay)
-OR-
later
Translate this connector in a way that is
most natural in your language.
he wrote down the dream: The king
probably wrote what he saw in the dream
on a scroll (12:4). A scroll was a roll of
paper made from papyrus leaves. If it is
necessary in your language to include
this information, you may say:
he wrote his dream on paper
-OR-
he recorded his dream in a book
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
(2) The whole clause is missing in some
ancient versions. 60 As a result, some
English versions do not translate it
(NRSV89, CEV95, NCV, Collins).
(3) Some translate the whole clause
(KJV,
RSV52,
ESVUS16,
Steinmann).
Option (1) is recommended.
and: There is no connector in the
Aramaic text. English versions interpret
the relationship between the two clauses
differently.
(1) The clause begins a new sentence.
It refers ahead to 7:2a.
Beginning the account … (NJPS85)
-OR-
The beginning of the account …
(Lucas, Goldingay 61, Cook)
(2) The connector introduces the next
event in the sequence.
Some
English add a connector that gives
this meaning.
and (RSV52, ESVUS16, NLT96,
REB89, TEV) 62
-OR-
then (NRSV89)
(3) Some English versions combine this
clause with the previous one.
7:1d
and told the sum of the matter: The
Aramaic phrase is literally: “the head of
the thing he said.” The syntax of this
clause awkward. 57 There is also a textual
problem. The phrase and told is missing
in some ancient versions. 58 In other
versions the whole clause is missing. 59
(1) Omit the verb and simply translate
the phrase the sum of the matter. A
number of English versions omit the
verb (GW, NLT96, REB89, NIV84,
NET08, TEV, Goldingay, Lucas).
See the discussion of the meaning of
this phrase below.
The beginning of the account…
(Lucas, Goldingay)
He wrote down the substance of his
dream (NIV84, NIV11).
-OR-
He wrote down the main parts of the
dream (GW)
-OR-
He wrote down the dream in
summary fashion (NET08)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
told: The verb that the RSV52 translates
told is literally “he said.” There is a
textual problem with this word. The verb
is missing in Theodotion, the Old Greek,
and Lucian.
(1) The verb is missing in some ancient
versions. 63
As a result, most
versions do not translate it. (GW,
Consultant Notes on Daniel
NLT96, REB89,
NJPS85, NJB).
NIV84,
TEV,
13
and this is how the narrative began
(NJB)
-OR-
(2) Some versions translate the verb of
speech (KJV, RSV52, ESVUS16).
Option (1) is recommended.
It is
recommended that you do not translate
this verb. Note also that a verb of speech
begins 7:1.
the sum of the matter: The Aramaic
phrase is literally, “the head of the
matters.” 64 English versions interpret
this phrase in different ways:
(1) This phrase means, “the beginning of
the matter.” It parallels the similar
phrase at the end of the chapter:
“the end of the matter” (7:28).
and here
(REB89)
his
account
begins
his
account
begins
-OR-
The beginning of the account:
(Lucas, Goldingay)
(2) It means, “main content.” 66
main parts (GW)
-OR-
substance (NIV84)
-OR-
in summary fashion (NET85)
-OR-
the main words (Steinmann)
(3) Some English versions do not
translate this word.
and this is the record … (TEV)
-OR-
and this is what he saw (NLT96)
-OR-
and this is how the narrative began
(NJB)
-OR-
The beginning of the
(Lucas, Goldingay, Cook)
account
(2) The phrase means, “the sum of the
matter.” See also Psalms 119:160.
The LXX takes this phrase as
connected to the previous clause.
he related
(Steinmann)
and here
(REB89)
the
main
words
-OR-
He wrote down the dream in
summary fashion (NET08)
-OR-
He wrote down the substance of his
dream (NIV84, NIV11)
-OR-
He wrote down the main parts of the
dream (GW)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
the sum: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates sum is literally “head.”
English versions interpret this word in
different ways:
(1) It has the figurative meaning:
“beginning”
(REB89,
NJB,
65
NJPS85)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
the matter: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates matter can have
different meanings. 67
(1) It refers to a written word. The
clause points ahead to 7:2a. For
example:
account (NJPS85, REB89)
-OR-
narrative (NJB)
(2) It refers to the content or object of
the
dream
(NIV84,
TEV,
NRSV89). 68 Following this view,
the phrase refers back to 7:1c. For
example:
what he saw (NLT96)
-OR-
what I saw (TEV)
-OR-
what he had dreamed (NRSV89,
NCV)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
14
Section 7:2-14
Daniel related (Goldingay)
The first section of Daniel 7 can be analyzed
as having a chiastic structure. In this section
Daniel tells what happened in his vision.
Daniel related
(NJPS85)
-OR-
2-3 Four beasts arise from the great sea to
rule over the earth
4-6 The first three beasts arise to rule
over the earth
7 A fourth beast with ten horns
arose to rule over the earth
9-10 The Ancient of Days sat in
judgment
11 The Ancient of Days destroyed
the fourth beast and the small horn
12 The Ancient of Days took away
from first three beasts their authority to rule
13-14 The Ancient of Day crowns one like
a son of man to rule over the whole earth in
an everlasting kingdom
The turning point in the narrative occurs in
vv. 9-10 when the Ancient of Days sits in
judgment. The climax of the action occurs
with the destruction of the fourth beast in v.
11. The resolution of the narrative problem
occurs in vv. 13-14 with the crowning of the
one like a son of man to rule over the earth.
Paragraph 7:2-3
In 7:2 Daniel began to tell what he saw in
his dream. A number of English versions
begin a new paragraph at 7:2 (GW, NLT96,
REB89, CEV95, NCV, NIV84).
Daniel said: The Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates said is literally,
“answering …and saying.” This is was a
common way a person would introduce a
speech in Aramaic. 69 In this context, it
introduces a new scene and new topic.
English versions translate this in different
ways:
(a) Use one verb of speech.
example:
For
Daniel said (NCV, NIV84, NJB,
Steinmann, Lucas)
following:
-OR-
Daniel explained (NET85)
-OR-
Daniel declared (ESVUS16)
(b) Use two verbs of speech like the
Aramaic (KJV). However, this may
be redundant and not natural in
many languages.
Daniel answered and he said
-OR-
Responding, Daniel said (Cook)
(c) Omit the phrase (GW, NLT96,
REB89, TEV) as some ancient
versions do. 70
In my vision (Lucas)
-OR-
I watched… (Collins)
(d)
Begin the clause with direct speech:
I
Daniel
(Theodotion)
was
watching…
Options (a) and (b) are good. Translate
the verbs of speech in a way that is
natural in your language.
“I saw: The Aramaic verb that the RSV52
translates saw is literally, “I was
seeing.” 71 English versions translate this
in different ways:
(1) It presents
action. 72
I, Daniel,
(REB89)
7:2
the
a
was
past
progressive
gazing
intently
-OR-
I was watching (NET85)
-OR-
I have been seeing (NJB)
-OR-
I was looking (Steinmann)
(2) It is a completed action
-OR-
I saw (TEV, NJPS85,
similarly, NLT96, NCV)
GW,
-OR-
I looked (NIV84, Lucas)
-OR-
I watched (Collins, Goldingay, )
Consultant Notes on Daniel
Interpretation (1) is recommended. The
same predicate phrase occurs in 7:2, 4, 67, 9, 11, 13, 21) and functions to
structure the visions.
in my vision: There is a textual issue with
this phrase. Both it and the next phrase
are missing in some ancients versions,
however, it is best to follow the
Masoretic text. 73
See the Notes on the meaning of the
word vision in 7:1b. Although in 7:1b
the word is plural, in this verse the word
is singular. Daniel probably saw the
same dream many times.
•
“vision” (NIV84, NJPS85, NCV,
NLT96, NIV11, REB89, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, NET08)
•
“visions” (NJB, GW)
connection with the word visions. James
Bejon suggests that prophetically the
night time depicts a period of darkness,
danger and misery. 75 It is possible, then,
that the image is used here to refer to “a
dark and dangerous period in Israel’s
history
and behold: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates behold functions as an
exclamation. 76 It often introduces a new
part of the vision (7:5, 6, 7, 13)
something that is new, unexpected or
surprising. 77 See the Notes at 2:31a;
4:10b.
•
The phrase that the RSV52 translates by
night is literally, “with night.”74 It
describes the time when Daniel saw the
dream.
(1) The time is indefinite. Daniel could
have seen the same dream on
several different nights.
at night (GW, NJPS85, NIV84,
NIV11)
-OR-
during the night (REB89, NET85,
NET08, Lucas, Goldingay)
-OR-
in the night (NJB, Steinmann)
(2) It refers to a specific night.
that night (NLT96, TEV)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. Some
versions do not translate this phrase since
this information was in 7:1 (CEV95).
However, it should also be noted that the
word night is repeated in 7:7 and 7:13 in
If your language has a special way to
introduce a new part of a dream, you
may be able to use it here. For
example:
and
behold
(RSV52,
KJV,
ESVUS11, Lucas, Steinmann)
Translate in a way that is most natural in
your language. If it is unnatural to repeat
this information, you may omit this
phrase (as in the TEV).
by night: There is a textual issue with this
phrase and the previous phrase. See the
end note on the phrase in my vision.
15
-OR-
and there before
NIV11, Goldingay)
me
(NIV84,
-OR-
and look (Cook)
-OR-
and suddenly there was
•
If your language has no special way
to a new part of a dream, you may
omit this word in your translation.
Most English versions do this
(NRSV89, GW. NLT96, REB89,
TEV, CEV95, NCV, NJPS85).
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
the four winds of heaven were stirring up
the great sea: The verb presents a
continuing action. The four winds refer
to winds that were blowing from all
directions. These strong wins cause a
great storm that was stirring up the waves
of the great sea. In some languages it
may be best to translate this clause as
two separate clauses. For example:
Winds were blowing from all four
directions. They caused a storm on
the great sea.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
Winds were coming from every
direction. They blew on the water
of great sea and were causing big
waves.
four winds of heaven: The phrase four
winds is a figure of speech. The phrase is
usually used in the OT to refer to the
whole earth. It refers to winds that came
from every direction. 78 The winds were
blowing from all directions at once.
•
If your language has the idea of four
main directions, you can translate
that here. For example:
the wind was blowing from all four
directions (NCV)
•
If your language does not have the
idea of four main directions, you can
use a more general expression. For
example:
a great storm…with strong winds
blowing from every direction
(NLT96, NLT07)
-OR-
winds were blowing
directions (TEV)
from
all
This image describes waves that were
crashing into each other from all
directions. The image communicates fear
and horror. Bejon notes that in the OT
the mention of “four winds” is often
associated with the dispersal of a peoplegroup. 79
Each
of
the
four
beasts/kingdoms described later did play
a role in the dispersion of the people of
Israel throughout the earth. The image
would have cause the reader to think that
something bad was about to happen.
heaven: The Aramaic word is
literally a plural, “heavens.” The word
only occurs in the plural and so there is
no distinctive in meaning between the
plural compared to a singular. Most
English versions translate it as a singular.
The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates heaven can refer to either
heaven (“the place where God lives”) or
“sky.”
Here it refers to the sky
16
(NET08). 80
In some languages this
phrase may be redundant, because the
winds normally blow in the sky. If that
is true in your language, you may omit
this phrase (GNTD, CEVUS06).
were stirring up: This verb describes
how the winds affected the sea. It depicts
a continuous and progressive action. It is
like what happens when a person stirs
some liquid very violently. Scholars have
interpreted this verb in at least two ways:
(1) It means, “to churn up, stir up”
(REB89, NJPS85 81)
stirring up (GW, RSV52, NRSV89,
CEV95,
NJPS85,
ESVUS11,
Goldingay, Lucas)
-OR-
churning (NLT96, NLT07, similarly
NIV84, NIV11, Steinmann, )
(2) It means, “to burst forth.” 82
Interpretation (1) is recommended. If
you have another way in your language
to naturally describe how the winds blow
during a violent storm at sea, you may us
it here.
the great sea: The Aramaic phrase that
the RSV52 translates the great sea has a
definite article. However, commentators
are uncertain whether it refers to a
specific sea. English versions translate
this phrase in different ways:
(1) It refers to the ocean, not an inland
sea. 83
the surface of the ocean (TEV)
-OR-
the mighty sea (CEV95)
-OR-
the great sea (NJPS85, RSV52,
NIV84, NET08, Steinmann, Lucas,
Collins) 84
(2) It is the name of a particular sea. 85
the Great
Goldingay)
Sea
(REB89,
NJB,
-OR-
the Mediterranean Sea (GW)
(3) It refers to a sea but does not say
which one.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
a great sea (NLT07)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. The
similar Hebrew phrase usually refers to
the Mediterranean Sea (Numbers 34:6-7;
Joshua 1:4; 9:1; 23:4; Jonah 1:12).
However, Steinmann notes that the
kingdoms that are mentioned later do not
all arise out of the Mediterranean area
and so there is no evidence that the
Aramaic phrase was intended to have the
same meaning as the Hebrew phrase.
In the Old Testament the sea was often a
symbol of what was wild, chaotic and
dangerous. Bejon suggests that in the
context of OT prophecy, the sea was
connected with the earth’s restless
Gentile nations and their propensity to
wage war against God’s people. 86
17
four huge animals were coming up
from the sea
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
four great beasts: The Aramaic word
that the RSV52 translates beasts can
refer to “animals, beasts, or wild
animals.” 89 However, in this context,
these animals were different from
animals that anyone had ever seen. The
images of these animals would have
caused people to be terrified. 90
four large animals (GW, Steinmann)
-OR-
four huge animals (NCV, Lucas,
Goldingay)
-OR-
four powerful beasts (CEV95)
-OR-
7:3a
four mighty beasts (NJPS85)
And: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context, it introduces the next event in
the dream. As the winds were stirring up
the seas, suddenly four animals came up
from the water. English versions translate
the connector differently.
and (NASB, REB89, KJV, RSV52,
NRSV89, Goldingay)
Use a term for beasts that best describes
these strange creatures in your language.
came up: The text does not describe how
the beasts came up. 91 What happens in
dreams is sometimes different from real
life. Use a verb that gives the general
idea that the beasts arose up from the
waters of the sea.
then (NLT96, NLT07, NET85)
were
coming
Steinmann)
-OR-
-OR-
Some English versions do not
translate the connector (NCV,
NJPS85, TEV, GW, NIV84, NIV11,
Steinmann, Lucas, Collins).
emerged (NJB)
-OR-
four large beasts came up out of the
water
(NASB,
out of the sea: The word sea refers to
the sea mentioned in 7:2. Others ways
to translate this are:
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
four great beasts came up out of the sea:
The animals did not come up out of the
water all at once. The verb implies a
continuous or repetitive action. 87 First,
one animal came up, then the next, and
so on. 88 Other ways to translate this
clause include:
up
from the sea (KJV, NET08, NCV.
Steinmann, Collins, Goldingay)
-OR-
out of the water (NLT96, NLT07)
-OR-
out of the ocean (TEV)
7:3b
different from one another: The Aramaic
word that the RSV52 translates different
means that the beasts were not like each
other. 92 In some languages it may be
Consultant Notes on Daniel
more natural to begin a new sentence.
For example:
Each one was different from the
others.
18
evil. 96 It has the unique ability to speak,
which mayalludes to the one wild animal in
the garden who had this special ability
Genesis 3:15).
-OR-
Each beast was different (CEV95)
-OR-
Each had a different form 93
Paragraph 7:4
-OR-
They were different from one
another (NET85)
Comment on 7:3a-b In some languages it
may be more natural to change the order of
the clauses. For example:
Four great beasts, each different
from the others, came up out of the
sea. (NIV84)
General Comment on the Images in
Daniel’s Vision:
Scholars have attempted to discover the
background to the images that Daniel saw in
his vision.
Different views have been
suggested.
For example some have
proposed that the image of the turbulent sea
comes from Canaanite mythology (the
conflict between Baal and Yam/Sea) or the
Babylonian myth the Enuma Elish, where
Marduk struggles with the chaotic forces of
Tiamat (Sea). 94 It is more likely that the
images come from the Bible itself. The
images of darkness and the winds blowing
over the sea is likely a parody of the creation
account in Genesis 1. Some have described
it as an anti-creation. 95 Gentry notes that
like Genesis, the Spirit or wind blows over
the sea. However, instead of a description
of God’s creative acts which culminate in
the creation of humans in the image of God,
the vision presents four hybred beasts, each
emerging from the chaotic sea in succession.
Each one is more frightening than the
previous. Each of the beasts is given the
authority to rule, whereas in Genesis 1
humans, created in the divine image, were
mandated to rule over the earth as God’s
representeatives.
The last beast in the
vision is completely different and unique in
its power and terror. It is the embodiment of
In 7:4 Daniel described the first beast that
came out of the sea. A number of English
versions begin a new paragraph at this verse
(NIV84, NIV11, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
NCV).
7:4a
The first was like a lion: Daniel compared
the first beast to a lion. 97 See the Notes at
6:7d. A lion is a large and powerful
animal of the cat family. They hunt and
kill other animals for food. The image of
the lion probably symbolized power and
majesty. 98 In some cultures, people may
not know about lions. If that is true in
your area and language, see KBT for
different ways to translate unknown
terms.
The first animal was like a lion
(GW)
-OR-
The first beast was like a lion
-OR-
The first one looked like a lion
(TEV)
first: The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates first refers to the animal that
came up first from the sea. The four
animals came up from the sea one after
another.
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context it introduces a contrast.
Although the first beast was like a lion, it
was also different from a lion. It had
wings. Some English translate a
connector that expresses this contrast.
but… (GW, REB89, TEV, NCV,
NJPS85, Collins, Lucas, Goldingay)
had eagles’ wings: Literally, “and wings of
an eagle (belonging) to it.” 99 Daniel
Consultant Notes on Daniel
described the first beast as having wings
like those of an eagle. One way to
translate this is by making a comparison.
but it had wings like an eagle (GW,
similarly TEV, NCV)
eagles: See the Notes at 4:33e. The
eagle is a large bird that kill and eat its
prey. It has large wings with long
feathers. Most English versions translate
it as eagles, but it can also refer to
different kinds of vultures.100 The image
probably symbolizes power and speed. 101
In some languages, people may not be
familiar with birds like this. If that is
true in your language, see KBT for
different ways to translate unknown
terms.
Comment on 7:4a: In some languages it
may be more natural to combine the two
clauses. For examples:
The first beast was like a lion with
eagles’ wings (NLT96)
Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, is
compared to a lion in Jeremiah 4:7 and
50:17. Steinmann notes that the Babylonian
king and armies are compared to eagles in
Jeremiah 4:13; 48:40; 49:22; Ezekiel 17:3;
Habakkuk 1:8. 102 The winged lion was also
a familiar motif in Babylonian art. 103 The
image represented the great speed and power
of a nation whose army was attempting to
conquer other lands.
7:4b
Then: The RSV52 has the connector then.
The Aramaic text does not have a
connector here. The context indicates
that the clause describes the next event
Daniel saw in his vision.
English
versions translate this connection in
different ways:
Then
(NRSV89,
CEVUS06)
RSV52,
Most English versions do not have a
connector here (GW, NLT96, NLT07,
REB89, NCV, CEV95, TEV, NJPS85,
NIV84). Translate this idea in a way that
is natural in your language.
19
as I looked: The Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates looked is literally, “I
was seeing until that...” The phrase
describes that Daniel continued to look at
what was happening in his dream.
English versions translate this in different
ways.
as I watched (NRSV89, NLT96,
CEV95, NET85)
-OR-
while I watched (TEV)
-OR-
I watched until (REB89, GW,
NIV84)
-OR-
I kept watching until
-OR-
I continued to watch until (Cook 104)
Translate this clause in a way that is
natural in your language.
its wings were plucked off: The Aramaic
clause which the RSV52 translates its
wings were plucked off is literally, “they
plucked off its wings.” The subject is
indefinite. Daniel did not say who or
what had plucked off the lion’s wings.
The person who did the action is not in
focus. Other ways to translate this are:
they (indefinite)
wings 105
tore
off
the
-OR-
someone plucked off its wings
Scholars interpret the symbolic action in
different ways. The context implies that
God is the one who likely did this.
However, it is best not to make this
explicit in the translation. Translate this
idea in a way that is natural in your
language.
plucked off: This verb is only used in
here in the book of Daniel. It means, “to
pull off, pull out, to pick.”
English
versions translate this phrase in different
ways:
pulled off (NLT96, CEV95, NET85)
-OR-
torn off (TEV, NCV, NIV84, NJB)
Scholars differ in the way they interpret
the symbolic action. 106 It probably has a
Consultant Notes on Daniel
negative connotation. It may imply that
the expansion of the Babylonian empire
slowed at the end of Nebuchadnezzar’s
reign. The image may also refer to
Nebuchadnezzar himself, who later in his
reign (Daniel 4) lost his ability to rule for
a period of time. See the discussion of
the symbolic meanings of the four beasts
in the General Comment on the Four
Beasts.
7:4c
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context, it introduces the next event in
Daniel’s dream. Other ways to translate
this in English are:
Then …(CEV95, Steinmann)
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language. Some English versions
do not use a connector here (TEV, NCV).
it was lifted up from the ground: This
is a passive clause. The verb means “to
be raised to an erect position.” 107 The
person who caused the action is not in
focus. In some languages it may be more
natural to translate this as an active
clause. For example;
from the ground:
The phrase is
ambiguous. The text does not clearly say
whether the whole animal was lifted off
the ground or if only its front feet were
lifted off the ground. It is probably more
natural to describe the final position of
the animal. For example:
to an upright position (CEV95)
Some English versions omit this phrase
(TEV).
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context, it introduces the result of the
previous action. For example:
so that (NIV84, CEV95)
made to stand upon two feet like a man:
This is a passive clause. 108 There are
different ways to translate this:
•
someone lifted it up from the ground
Scholars differ in how they interpret the
symbolic action. The image of the lion
probably refers to both the Babylonian
empire and King Nebuchadnezzar. The
description of what happened to the first
beast is similar to the humbling and
restoration of Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel
4. If this is true, then God was the
implied
agent
who
caused
Nebuchadnezzar to lose his authority as
king and it was God also who also
restored Nebuchadnezzar to his position
again. See the discussion of the symbolic
meanings of the four beasts in the
General Comment on the Four Beasts.
Translate it as a stative clause:
it stood on two feet … (NIV84,
NIV11)
•
Translate it as an active indefinite
clause. For example:
They (indefinite) made it stand up
straight upon its two back feet, like
a man would stand.
-OR-
they (indefinite) lifted it up from the
ground
-OR-
20
someone made it stand up on its two
back feet, like a person.
•
Translate it as a passive:
It was made to stand on two feet like
a man (NET08)
-OR-
and made to stand on its feet like a
man (Steinmann)
Translate this clause in a way that is
natural in your language.
Scholars interpret the symbolic action in
different ways. 109 The action seems to be
positive. The beast became more
humanlike. This may be a reference to
the way God restored Nebuchadnezzar in
Daniel 4. Nebuchadnezzar had lost the
ability to rule his kingdom because of
pride. However, later he recognized and
confessed his attitude and was restored to
Consultant Notes on Daniel
his place as ruler. In this context, the
person who caused the action is not
explicitly mentioned, but the larger
context implies that God was behind
Nebuchadnezzar’s fall and restoration.
See the discussion of the symbolic
meanings of the four beasts in the
General Comment on the Four Beasts.
upon two feet: The Aramaic word that
the RSV52 translates feet can refer to
human 110 or animal feet. In some
languages you may have a special word
for a lion’s feet. Translate this idea in a
way that is natural in your language.
with its two hind feet on the ground
(NLT96, NLT07)
-OR-
21
Scholars interpret the symbolic action in
different ways. It is likely that this is a
reference to the way God restored
Nebuchadnezzar to his right mind in
Daniel 4.
mind: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates mind is literally,
“heart.” The Old Testament refers to the
“heart” as the place in the body where
people think, feel and make decisions.
The English language uses the word
mind for this idea. Use a word that
naturally expresses this idea in your
language.
man: See the Notes at 7:4c.
it: The pronoun it refers to the beast. 112
up straight (TEV)
man:
The word that the RSV52
translates man refers to human beings in
general, both men and women.
human being (NRSV89, NLT96,
NLT07, NIV11, REB89)
-OR-
human (GW, NCV)
If your language uses man or the
masculine gender to represent humans in
general, you can use that here.
7:4d
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . It introduces
the next event in Daniel’s dream. Other
ways to translate this connector are:
Paragraph 7:5
In 7:5 Daniel saw in his vision a second
beast that came up from the sea. A number
of English versions begin a new paragraph
at this verse (NIV84, GW, NLT96, TEV,
CEV95, NCV, Steinmann).
7:5a
And: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context, it introduces the next event in
Daniel’s dream. Daniel saw the second
beast come up out of the water. English
versions translate this connection in
different ways:
•
and then …(GNTD)
and (NIV84, NIV11, ESVUS16,
NJB, KJV, RSV52)
-OR-
then..(BIMK)
the mind of a man was given to it:
This is a passive clause. The person who
caused the action is not in focus. In
some languages it may be more natural to
translate this as an active clause with an
indefinite subject. For example:
Someone gave it a human mind.
-OR-
Someone caused it to think like a
person
-OR-
It received a human mind 111
Translate a connector
-OR-
then (GW, NLT96, NLT07, REB89,
NJPS85, NET08, NCV)
•
Some English versions do not use a
connector.
The connection is
implied by the context.
The second beast… (TEV, CEV95)
-OR-
Another beast appeared… (NRSV)
-OR-
I saw … (GW)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
It looked like a bear (GW, NLT96,
NLT11)
Translate this connection in a way that is
natural to introduce the next event in a
sequence in your language.
behold: See the Notes at 7:2. The Aramaic
word that the RSV52 translates behold
often introduces something that is new,
unexpected or surprising. It is also used
to introduce a dream or a new part of a
dream. 113
•
If your language has a special way to
introduce a new part in a dream, you
may use it here.
Behold (Steinmann, Collins, Lucas)
-OR-
22
-OR-
It resembled a bear
bear: A bear is a large, heavy, clumsy
animal with shaggy fur and a short
tale. 115 It is a violent and powerful
animal. 116 Some languages may not have
a term for a bear. If that is true in your
language you may want to look at KBT to
learn how to translate unknown terms. In
some cases you may have to borrow a
term from the national language or use a
general expression for “a large, ferocious
animal.” 117
look (Cook)
-OR-
I looked and suddenly…
-OR-
And there before me (NIV84,
NIV11)
-OR-
I saw …before me (NCV)
•
If your language has no special way
to introduce a dream, you may omit
this word in your translation. Most
English versions do this (NRSV89,
GW, NLT96, REB89, TEV, CEV95,
NJPS85).
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
7:5b
It was raised up on one side: This is a
passive clause. 118 However, the agent of
the action is not identified. Other ways
to translate this are:
•
It was raised up on one side
(RSV52, NRSV89, ESVUS16,
NET08)
-OR-
It was raised up on one of its sides
(NIV84, NIV11)
•
In other languages it may be more natural
to combine the two phrases: 114
there before me was a second beast
(NIV84, NJB)
-OR-
I saw a second animal (GW)
-OR-
I saw a second creature
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
like a bear: In some languages it may be
more natural to translate this as a
sentence. For example:
As an indefinite:
One had caused it to be raised it on
one side
another beast, a second one, In some
languages it may be more natural to add
a verb. For example:
Another beast appeared, a second
one (NRSV89)
As a stative:
-OR-
Someone had cause it to be raised
on one side
raised up on one side: The Aramaic
verb that the RSV52 translates raised
means, “to be set up.” 119 English versions
interpret the bear’s position in different
ways.
(1) Someone had raised the bear up on
one side. However, the text does
not make the agent explicit. See the
General Comment on the Four
Beasts, which suggests that God was
the implied agent of this action.
(2)
It means to raise itself up on one
side of its body with its head and
paw raised up.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
It was rearing up on one side
(NLT96, NLT11, NJB)
(1) It refers to ribs (the curved bones
that covered the chest). 127
(2) It means, “to raise up on its hind
legs.” 120
standing on its hind legs (TEV,
CEV95)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. 121
Scholars differ in how they interpret the
symbolic image. 122 Some think that bear
may have been in a position ready to
attack. 123 However, that action would
have normally described the bear as
standing up on its hind legs. 124 It is more
likely that the text implies that God is the
one who is the implied agent. See the
discussion in the General Comment on
the Four Beasts which suggests that God
had granted greater dominion to one part
of this two empire. 125
7:5c
The connector tells what else the beast was
doing. The RSV52 does not translate the
Aramaic connector . English versions
translations
translate
this
connector
differently.
and (KJV, NJPS85, NIV84, NIV11,
GW, NLT96, NLT07, REB89,
NCV, NET08)
-OR-
with (NJB)
Translate this connector in a way that is
natural in your language.
it had three ribs in its mouth between its
teeth: The phrase is literally, ‘and three
ribs in its mouth.” The RSV52 adds the
implied information it had. The bear was
finishing to eat an animal that it had
killed. Other ways to translate this clause
in English are:
It was holding three ribs between its
teeth (TEV, similarly CEV95)
-OR-
It held three ribs in its mouth
between its teeth 126
three ribs: English versions translate
the Aramaic phrase in two ways:
23
three ribs (NIV84, NIV11, NJB,
GW, NET08, NLT96, NLT07,
REB89, KJV, RSV52)
(2) It refers to teeth. 128
three tusks (NRSV89, NASB)
-OR-
three fangs (NJPS85)
Interpretation one is recommended.
Scholars interpret the meaning of the
symbolic image in different ways. 129
However try to translate it in a literal
way. The text does not say what kind of
animal the bear was eating. Translate
this word in a way that is natural in your
language.
in its mouth between its teeth: In some
languages, this phrase may be redundant.
If something is between the teeth, it is
also in the mouth. If it is unnatural to
use both of these phrases together in your
language, you may be able to use one
phrase. For example:
between its teeth (TEV)
-OR-
in its teeth (NLT96)
7:5d
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and are actually two
words: plus the connector “thus,
so.” 130 In this context, the second word
points with emphasis to the command
that follows. English versions translate
the connector in different ways:
•
and
(KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, NLT96, NLT11, TEV,
CEV95,
•
Some English versions do not
translate the connectors (REB89,
GW, NCV, NIV84, NIV11, NJPS85,
NET08, NJB).
Translate this connection in a way that is
most natural in your language.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
it was told: Literally, “they were saying.”
The RSV52 translates this as a passive
clause (similarly CEV95, NCV, NIV84,
NJPS85). The clause does not identify
the speaker. Modern versions translate
the speech clause in different ways. For
example:
•
Translate it as an indefinite pronoun
(as in Aramaic):
They (indefinite) were saying 131
•
Translate it as a singular:
Someone was commanding it
-OR-
I heard someone saying to it 132
-OR-
a voice said to it (TEV)
•
Change the order of the clause
-OR-
Go on (TEV)
-OR-
Attack (CEV95)
-OR-
Arise (Steinmann, Collins, Cook)
Sometimes this form implies that God
was the subject of the symbolic action.138
In other contexts, it simply implies that
the subject is not if focus. The former is
probably the case here. God or someone
he authorized gave the command.
devour much flesh: The Aramaic verb that
that the RSV52 translates devour is
literally, “eat.” In this context, the word
implies “to eat in a hungry or voracious
way.” English versions translate the
phrase differently:
eat much meat (NJPS85)
It received an order to 133
Translate this clause in a way that is most
natural in your language.
Scholars
interpret the meaning of the symbolic
image in different ways.
The text
implies that God or someone he had
delegated or authorized the bear to take
this action. However, it is usually best
not to make the agent explicit in the
translation. 134
told: The Aramaic verb that the RSV52
translates it was told is literally, “they
were saying to it.” 135 The third person
plural is indefinite. The identity of the
speaker is not in focus. Since the speech
that follows is a command, you may
translate the verb “commanded” or
“ordered.”
Arise: The Aramaic verb that the RSV52
translates arise means, “to rise.” 136
Someone ordered the second beast to get
up. The context implies that the beast
was to get up and attack other animals.
English versions translate this command
differently:
Get up! (GW, NLT96, NLT07,
REB89, NCV, NIV84, NIV11,
NET08, Lucas, Goldingay)
-OR-
Stand up! 137
24
-OR-
eat as much meat as you can (TEV)
-OR-
gorge yourself with flesh (REB89)
-OR-
eat your fill of flesh (NIV84,
NIV11)
Once again God or someone he
authorized is the subject of the symbolic
action.
flesh:
The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates flesh can have different
meanings. English versions translate it
differently.
(1) It means “meat.” 139 It can refer
generally to the meat from either
animals or human bodies.
meat (GW, TEV, NCV, GW)
(2) It is a figure of speech that means,
“people.”
people (NLT96)
(3)
It refers to both of the above:
The flesh of many people! (NLT07)
Interpretation one is recommended.
Options (2 and (3) interpret the symbolic
meaning behind the image. See the
discussion of the symbolic meanings of
Consultant Notes on Daniel
the four beasts in the General Comment
on the Four Beasts
25
(2) It is a completed action
I looked (RSV52, NCV, NIV84,
NJB)
Paragraph 7:6
-OR-
I saw (GW)
In 7:6 Daniel described the third beast that
came up from the sea. A number of English
versions begin a new paragraph at this verse
(NIV84, NIV11, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
TEV, CEV95, NCV, NET08).
7:6a
After this: The Aramaic phrase that the
RSV52 translates After this introduces
the next event in the dream. 140 Daniel
saw the third beast coming out of the
water. English versions translate this
connector in different ways:
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Some English versions consider the
phrase I looked implied by the context
and do not translate it (CEV95).
and lo: The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates lo is translated “behold” at 7:2,
5:a.
This word often introduces
something that is unexpected or
surprising. It is also used to introduce a
dream or a new part of a dream. 143
•
After this (NJB, GW, REB89,
NRSV89, ESVUS16, Steinmann,
Lucas, Collins)
-OR-
behold (NASB, ESVUS16)
After that (NIV84, NIV11, NJPS85,
Goldingay)
-OR-
and suddenly…
-OR-
-OR-
Then (NCV, NLT96, NLT07)
Translate this connector in a way that this
most natural in your language. Some
English translation do not include a
connector because the sequence is
implied by the context (TEV, CEV95).
I looked: See the Notes at 7:2. The
Aramaic verb that the RSV52 translates
saw is literally, “I was seeing.” 141
English versions translate this in different
ways:
(1) It is a continuous action
as I watched (NRSV89, Lucas)
-OR-
as I gazed ... (REB89)
-OR-
while I was watching (TEV)
-OR-
I was watching (Cook)
-OR-
I kept looking (NASB)
-OR-
as I looked (NJPS85)
-OR-
I continued to look (Steinmann,
similarly BFrCL97. 142
If your language has a special way to
introduce a new part in a dream, you
may be able to use that here. English
versions translate this word in
different ways:
there before me was… (NCV,
NIV84, NIV11, NJB, Goldingay)
•
If your language does not have a
special way to introduce a dream,
you may be able omit this word in
your translation.
Most English
versions do this (NRSV89, GW,
NLT96, REB89, TEV, CEV95,
NJPS85).
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
another: In some languages it may be more
natural to add implied information. For
example:
another animal (GW)
-OR-
another beast (NIV84)
-OR-
the third beast (CEV95)
-OR-
another beast appeared (TEV)
-OR-
the third of these strange beasts
appeared (NLT96, NLT11)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
Translate this word in a way that is most
natural in your language.
26
versions make this contrast explicit in the
translation. For example:
but (TEV, Lucas, Goldingay)
7:6b
-OR-
like a leopard: In some languages it may
be more natural to translate this phrase as
a clause or sentence. For example:
It was like a leopard.
-OR-
It looked like a leopard (GW,
NLT96, NLT11, TEV, NCV)
leopard: Scholars differ as to whether
this animal refers to a panther or a
leopard.
•
Some interpret it is a panther. 144 A
panther is a large ferocious animal of
the cat family. It has a yellowish or
tan color. It is similar to a puma,
cougar or mountain lion in North
America.
•
Others interpret it is a leopard. 145
This is another large, ferocious
animal of the cat family. The leopard
has a yellowish-brown coat with
black spots. It lives in Africa and
Asia. In North and South America,
the jaguar is similar to a leopard.
Both terms are acceptable. The leopard
was known for its speed. 146 It was
dangerous because it could attack
without any warning. 147 Some languages
may not have a term for either of these
animals. If that is true in your language
you will need to look at how to translate
unknown terms in KBT. In some cases
you may have to borrow a term from the
national language or use a general
expression for a large, fast, ferocious
animal.
7:6c
with: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translate with is . In this
context it introduces a contrast. The beast
was like a leopard but it was also
different. The beast had wings on its
back and it had four heads. Some English
except that (CEV95)
four wings of a bird on its back: The
leopard had four wings on its back. In
some languages it may be more natural to
translate this phrase as a sentence. For
example:
On its back there were four wings,
like the wings of a bird (TEV)
-OR-
There were four wings attached to
the back of the beast.
wings of a bird: Scholars differ in the
way they interpret this phrase. 148 You
should translate the image as literal as
possible, without interpreting its
meaning. The Aramaic preposition that
the RSV52 translates of has been
translated in different ways.
wings like those of a bird (NIV84,
NIV11, TEV, NCV, GW, NLT96)
-OR-
Four bird-like wings (NET08)
-OR-
bird’s wings (NJB, NLT07, Lucas,
Goldingay)
-OR-
bird wings (Steinmann)
Since only birds have wings, it may be
redundant to repeat this information. If
that is true in your language, you may be
able to omit the phrase of a bird. For
example:
It had four wings (CEV95)
If your language has different terms for
wings, you should use a term that
describes large wings, like the wings in
7:4a.
The leopard was a very fast
animal. The fact that it had four wings
implies that it was especially fast. 149 The
four wings may also symbolize the four
directions of the compass (north, east,
south and west). Besides its speed, this
animal was able to move quickly in all
directions. 150 See the discussion of the
Consultant Notes on Daniel
symbolic meanings of the four beasts in
the General Comment on the Four Beasts
on its back: There is a textual problem.
The meaning of the Aramaic word that
the RSV52 translates back is uncertain.
(1) It means, “on its back” (ESVUS16,
NIV84, NIV11, NJPS85, NASB,
NRSV89, KJV, GW, NLT96,
NLT07, REB89, TEV, NCV). 151
(2) It means, “on its side.” 152
(3) It means, “on its sides.” 153
on its flanks (NJB)
Interpretation (1) is probably best.
7:6d
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context it introduces a second thing that
was different from a leopard.
•
translate a connector
and (NRSV89, NLT96, NLT11,
TEV, CEV95)
•
This view would imply the great extent
of the empire. However, see the
discussion of the symbolic meanings of
the four beasts in the General Comment
on the Four Beasts.
7:6e
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context it introduces something new
about the third beast.
dominion was given to it: This is a passive
clause. The text does not explicitly say
who gave the third beast the power to
rule. This is similar to the anonymous
command that was given to the second
beast who was told to “arise, and eat
much flesh.” In Aramaic, third person
forms can be impersonal. In some
contexts, this may implies that the
subject is not in focus. There are
different ways to translate this idea in
English.
•
-OR-
This beast had four heads (NIV84,
NIV11, NET08)
Great authority was given to this
beast (NLT07)
Translate the connector in a way that is
natural in your language.
-OR-
Ruling authority was given to it
(NT08)
the beast had four heads: Other ways
English versions translate this are:
had
four
Translate it as a passive:
It was given authority to rule
(CEVUS06)
translate without a connector
This creature
(REB89)
27
heads
-OR-
This animal also had four heads
(GW)
four heads: The third beast had four
heads. You should translate this literally.
Scholars differ in the way they interpret
the symbolic meaning of the image. 154
Some scholars who think that the leopard
symbolizes Greece, interpret the four
heads as the four generals who succeeded
Alexander the Great. 155 Others suggest
the number four has a more general
meaning in that it may be similar to the
phrase “four corners of the earth.” 156
•
Translate it using an indefinite form:
They (indefinite) gave him the
authority to rule
-OR-
The beast received the power to rule
over people 157
. However, sometimes the passive clause
implies that God is the agent of the
action. God authorizes or allows the
action, but the beast is not a direct agent
of God. 158 When later the one like a son
of man receives dominion, the context
clearly states that it was given to him by
the God (the Ancient of Days). In the
present text it is usually best if possible
Consultant Notes on Daniel
to leave the subject indefinite, even
though God is the one who lies behind
the action.
dominion: See the Notes at 4:3d. The
Aramaic word that the RSV52 translates
dominion is a synonym of the word
“kingdom.” It can have different
meanings, depending on the context.
(1) It means, “authority, power to rule.”
(2) It means, “to rule.”
(3) It refers to the people whom the king
rules over.”
(4) It refers to “the territory that the king
rules over.”
Interpretation (1) is best. The third beast
received the authority and power to rule.
English versions translate this in different
ways:
authority (NJB)
-OR-
great power 159
-OR-
great authority (NLT96, NLT07)
-OR-
power to rule (GW, NCV)
-OR-
authority to rule (NIV84, NIV11,
CEV95, similarly the NET08)
The text does not explicitly say who he
would rule over. However, the symbol
of four heads and four wings implies that
the third creature would rule over a great
empire.
28
event in the dream. 160 Daniel saw the
fourth beast coming out of the water.
English versions translate this in different
ways:
After this (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, GW, Steinmann, Lucas,
Collins)
-OR-
Next (NJB, REB89)
-OR-
After that (NIV84, NIV11, NJPS85,
NCV, Goldingay)
-OR-
After these things (NET08)
-OR-
Then (NLT96, NLT07)
-OR-
Finally 161
Translate this connector in a way that this
most natural in your language. In some
English translations the connection
between the clauses is implied by the
context. In that case you may not have to
translate a connector (TEV, CEV95).
I saw: See the Notes at 7:2; 6a. The
Aramaic verb that the RSV52 translates
saw is literally, “I was seeing.” 162
English versions translate this in different
ways:
(1) It describes a continuous action
as I was watching (TEV, NET08)
-OR-
I kept looking (NASB)
-OR-
as I looked on (NJPS85)
-OR-
I continued looking (Steinmann)
Paragraph 7:7
The author begins this paragraph with a
phrase that is almost the same as the one that
begins 7:2b. This phrase emphasizes the
importance of the fourth beast. A number of
English versions begin a new paragraph at
7:7a (NIV84, NIV11, NET08, GW, NLT96,
NLT07, TEV, CEV95, NCV).
7:7a
After this: See the Notes at 7:6a. The
Aramaic phrase that the RSV52
translates after this introduces the next
-OR-
I continued to look at 163
(2) It describes a completed action
I looked (NIV84, NIV11)
-OR-
I saw (GW, KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
NLT96, NLT07, REB89, NCV,
NJB)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Some English versions consider the
phrase I saw as implied by the context
and as a result they do not translate it
(CEV95).
Consultant Notes on Daniel
in the night visions: There are different
ways to translate this in English. For
example:
in the visions by night (NRSV89)
-OR-
the visions that appeared to me
during the night 164
-OR-
nocturnal visions 165
Translate in a way that is most natural in
your language. Some versions do not
translate this phrase since the same
information was in 7:2 (TEV, CEV95).
You may do the same if it is unnatural to
repeat this information here.
night:
The word that the RSV52
translates night describes the time when
Daniel saw the dream. See also Notes
at 7:2.
(1) The time is indefinite. Daniel could
have seen the same dream on
several different nights.
night visions (KJV,
ESVUS16, REB89)
RSV52,
-OR-
by night (NRSV89)
-OR-
at night (NJPS85, NCV, NIV84)
-OR-
during the night (GW, REB89)
-OR-
in the night (NJB)
(2) It refers to a specific night.
that night (NLT96, NLT07)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
visions: See the Notes on the word vision
in 7:1b; 2. Here the word is plural.
Daniel may have seen the same dream
many times. English versions translate
in different ways:
(1) “visions” (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
NJB, REB89)
(2) “vision” (GW, NLT96, NIV84,
NJPS85, NCV)
It is recommended that you translate the
plural form visions. Translate in a way
that is most natural in your language.
29
and behold: See the Notes on “behold” at
7:2, 5:a and “lo” at 7:6a. The Aramaic
word that the RSV52 translates behold
often introduces something that is
unexpected or surprising. The same
connector is also used to introduce a
dream or a new part of a dream. 166
(1) If your language has a special way
to introduce a new part in a dream,
you may be able to translate it that
way here. English version translate
this word in different ways:
and behold (NASB, KJV, RSV52,
ESVUS16,
Steinmann,
Lucas,
Collins)
-OR-
and suddenly…
-OR-
there before me (NIV84, NIV11,
NJB, Goldingay)
-OR-
there in front of me (NCV)
(2) If your language has no special way
to introduce a dream, you may omit
this word in your translation. Most
English versions do not translate it
(NRSV89, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
REB89, TEV, CEV95,
NET08,
NJPS85).
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
a fourth beast: See the Notes on “four
great beasts” at 7:3a. This beast was
different from the other three beasts that
Daniel saw in the dream. At the same
time, it is similar to the fourth kingdom
in the statue in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream
(2:40). There are different ways to
translate this in English:
a fourth beast (NIV84, NJB,
NLT96, NJPS85, NIV84, REB89,
CEV95, TEV)
-OR-
a fourth animal (GW, NCV)
-OR-
a fourth strange creature
Translate this creature in a way that is
most natural in your language. In some
Consultant Notes on Daniel
dreadful (KJV, RSV52, ESVUS16,
NRSV89, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
Lucas, )
languages it may be natural to add
another verb. For example:
a fourth beast appeared (TEV)
-OR-
-OR-
grisly (REB89)
a fourth beast came up out of the
water
7:7b
terrible and dreadful and exceedingly
strong: In some languages it may be
more natural to begin a new sentence.
For example:
It was powerful, horrible, terrifying
(TEV)
-OR-
The fourth beast was strong and
more terrifying than the others
(CEV95)
-OR-
terrible (TEV,
Steinmann)
NCV,
NET08,
In some languages it may be more
natural to use one word to translate the
synonyms terrible and dreadful. 169
and exceedingly strong: See the Notes
at 2:40a. The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates exceedingly is a
superlative. The beast was stronger than
any of the other beasts. 170 Ways to
translate this in English include:
very powerful (NIV84, NIV11)
-OR-
terrible: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates terrible refers to
something that makes people afraid. The
beast was “dreadful.” 167 People are
frightened of different things in different
cultures. In this context, the beast
appeared very aggressive and destructive.
English versions translate this idea in
different ways.
exceedingly strong (KJV, RSV52,
NRSV89,
REB89,
Steinmann,
Lucas)
-OR-
extraordinarily
Goldingay)
strong
(GW,
-OR-
very strong (NLT96, NLT07, NCV,
NET08)
-OR-
powerful (TEV)
terrible (KJV, RSV52, Lucas)
-OR-
-OR-
stronger… that the others (CEV95)
terrifying (NRSV89, GW, NLT96,
NLT07, NIV84, NIV11)
7:7c
-OR-
fearsome
(REB89,
similarly Goldingay)
30
Collins,
-OR-
horrible (TEV)
-OR-
cruel (NCV)
-OR-
frightening (Steinmann)
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
dreadful: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates dreadful occurs only
here in the book of Daniel. It is a
synonym of terrible. 168 English versions
translate it in different ways. For
example:
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context, it introduces a clause that
describes what the fourth beast looked
like.
(1) Some English versions begin a new
sentence at 7:7c (NRSV89, TEV,
CEV95, NCV, NIV84).
With its huge iron teeth…(TEV)
-OR-
It had large iron teeth (NCV,
NIV84)
(2) Some English versions connect this
clause closely with 7:7b.
and (GW)
-OR-
with… (REB89, NJPS85)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
The first option is recommended.
it had great iron teeth: The Aramaic
phrase that the RSV52 translates iron
teeth is literally, “teeth of iron.” The
fourth beast had teeth that were made of
iron. They were also very big. The
following are some ways English version
translate it:
It had large iron teeth (GW, NCV,
NIV84, NIV11)
-OR-
With its huge iron teeth (NLT96,
TEV)
-OR-
Its huge teeth were made of iron
(CEV95)
iron: See the Notes at 2:33a. Iron was
the most common and useful of metals.
Although it had less commercial value
than gold, silver and bronze, people
valued iron for its superior strength.
People used iron to make tools and
weapons. In this context, the author used
the word iron in a figurative way. It
symbolizes an unusual power and ability
to destroy.
31
translates devour is literally, “eat.” In
this context, the word implies to “eat up
hungrily or voraciously.” The verb
implies a continuous action. 171 English
versions translate the phrase differently:
eating (Goldingay)
-OR-
it was devouring (NRSV89)
-OR-
it was eating hungrily
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is .
In this
context, it introduces a clause that
describes more how the beast ate its
victims.
broke in pieces: The Aramaic verb that that
the RSV52 translates broke in pieces
means, “to crush.” The verb describes a
continuous action. 172 The beast crushed
its victims with its great iron teeth
(NLT96, TEV, CEV95). 173
crushed its victims with huge iron
teeth (NLT96, NLT07)
-OR-
with its huge iron teeth it crushed its
victims (TEV)
-OR-
The iron teeth relate the fourth beast to
the fourth kingdom represented in
Nebuchadnezzar’s statue (Daniel 2:3335, 40-45). The shins and the feet of the
statue were also made of iron.
Grind with its teeth (CEV95)
-OR-
breaking into pieces (NRSV89)
-OR-
crushed its victims (GW)
-OR-
crunched (REB89)
7:7d
The Aramaic clause in 7:7c does not have a
connector. English versions begin this clause
in different ways.
(1) Some English versions connect 7:7d
closely with 7:7c either with a
connector (NJB) or by combining
the clauses (NLT96, NLT07, TEV,
CEV95). See the comment below.
(2) Some English versions begin a new
sentence at 7:7b (NRSV89, GW,
REB89, NCV).
The first option is recommended.
it devoured: See the Notes at 7:5d. The
Aramaic verb that that the RSV52
Comment on 7:7c and d: In some languages
it is more natural to combine these two
clauses. For example:
It devoured and crushed its victims
with huge iron teeth (NLT96)
Another possibility is to change the order of
the verbs. For example:
With its huge iron teeth it crushed
and ate what it killed.
Translate in a way that is most natural in
your language.
7:7d
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
Consultant Notes on Daniel
context it joins the next clause closely to
the one that precedes. Most English
versions use a connector:
and (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
REB89, NJPS85, NJB, NET08,
NJPS85)
-OR-
and then (TEV, NCV)
Translate this connector in a way that is
natural in your language.
stamped the residue with its feet: The
Aramaic verb that the RSV52 translates
stamped means, “to tread down” with
one’s feet. 174 In this context, the verb
describes a continuous action. 175 For
example:
stamping what was left with its feet
(NRSV89)
-OR-
trampling what was left
the residue: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates residue refers to what
is left or remains of something. 176 It can
refer to people, animals, or silver and
gold.
In this context, it refers to
whatever was left that the beast had not
eaten and crushed. English versions
translate this in different ways:
what was left (NRSV89, NIV84,
similar GW, NCV)
-OR-
what it did not grind with its teeth
(CEV95)
-OR-
what it didn’t eat
-OR-
the remains (NJPS85, similar NJB)
-OR-
them (TEV – “the victims”)
32
It was different: The Aramaic word that
the RSV52 translates different has a
different form than the same word in
7:3b. 177 Here it means, “distinct.” Other
ways to translate this in English are:
It was unique
-OR-
It was absolutely different 178
-OR-
It was completely different 179
Translate this in a way that is natural in
your language.
from all the beasts that were before it:
The fourth beast was different from the
three other beasts that Daniel had seen
before it. Other ways English versions
translate this include:
from all the other animals that I had
seen before (GW, similar NCV)
-OR-
from any of the other beasts
(NLT96, NLT07)
-OR-
from the others (CEV95)
before it: The Aramaic phrase that the
RSV52 translates before it has a temporal
meaning. Daniel refers to the three
beasts that he had seen before he saw the
fourth beast.
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . English
versions translate this connector in
different ways.
(1) It introduces a clause that tells why
the fourth beast was so different
from the others (TEV). 180
because it had ten horns (TH on
Daniel)
-OR-
7:7f
The Aramaic clause in 7:7f begins with the
connector . It introduces a summary
statement about the fourth beast. Most
English versions begin a new sentence at
7:7f (RSV52, NRSV89, GW, NLT96,
NLT07, REB89, NIV84, NIV84, NJPS85,
NET08, NJB, TEV, CEV95, NCV).
in that it had ten horns (Steinmann)
(2) It introduces one of the reasons why
the fourth beast was so different.
In particular, the fourth creature had
ten horns
(3) It introduces another thing that was
different about the fourth beast.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
and (CEV95, NCV, NLT96,
NLT07, REB89, KJV, RSV52,
NRSV89, NJPS85, NIV84, NIV11,
NET08, NJB)
-OR-
It also (Lucas, Goldingay)
Interpretation (1) and (2) are good.
it had ten horns: A horn is a hard, bonelike
projection that grows on the head of
some animals, such as cows, sheep, or
goats. The horn is a common metaphor
in the Old Testament. 181 It often
represents power and strength. 182 The
fourth beast had ten horns. In this
context
the
number
symbolizes
exceeding great power. It had power that
exceeded all others. 183
The image of the horn as power came to
symbolize by metonymy to symbolize
the person who had that power. In this
context, it may refer to ten powerful
kings who ruled at the same time.” 184
These rulers had an arrogant lust for
power. 185 You should try to translate this
image as literal as possible.
General Comment on the Four Beasts:
Daniel 2 and 7 are visions that describe the
same thing but with different images. In
Daniel 2 the scene is on earth. King
Nebuchadnezzar dreamed of a gigantic
image made of four metals. The metals
represent four human kingdoms. At the end
of the vision the four kingdoms were struck
by a stone and destroyed. The stone grew
larger and larger until it filled the whole
earth. The image of the statue represents
four successive human kingdoms. The stone
that struck the image and which became a
great mountain is the kingdom of God. This
kingdom will endure forever.
In Daniel 7 the scene changes to heaven.
This time Daniel dreamed of four beasts
which rose out of a chaotic sea. Each beast
was more terrible than the previous one,
until the last one appeared and it was the
most terrible and powerful of all. Next
Daniel saw a court scene where a divine
33
judge rendered his verdict against the four
beasts and they were destroyed. The images
of the four beasts represent four kings
(7:17). At the end of the vision the
dominion of the four beasts is taken away
and the divine judge gives authority to rule
over all nations to one like a son of man.
Like the dream of the statue in Daniel 2, the
dream of the four beats describes four
human kingdoms followed by the kingdom
of God. 186 The dream of the statue presents
an earthly perspective of the four kingdoms.
The dream of the four beats gives a heavenly
perspective. 187 The earthly perspective
depicts the four kingdoms in glorious terms.
Each kingdom is made of a precious metal.
Each kingdom implies worth and power.
The heavenly perspective shows the human
kingdoms for what they are: cruel, greedy
and violent.
The symbolism of the four human kingdoms
is complex. 188 Like the four parts of the
statue, each of the four beasts represents
four kingdoms.
Each of the beasts also
represent four kings (7:17.
A beast can
symbolize a kingdom and its ruler at the
same time. Behind each of the earthly kings
is also a heavenly authority or prince
(Daniel 10). Daniel 10 refers to the prince
of Persia, the prince of Greece and the
prince of Israel, each representing a
supernatural power. In summary, each of
the four beasts represent first, the people
who belong to that kingdom, second, the
king who rules over the kingdom, and third,
the supernatural power that lay behind the
kingdom’s power. 189
Each of the visions that follows in the book
of Daniel expands on the main vision
presented in Daniel 2 and 7. Chapter 8 gives
more detail about the second and third
kingdom. Daniel 9 expands and gives
greater detail about the fourth kingdom and
the kingdom of God. Finally, Daniel 10-12
gives new details about the second, third and
fourth kingdom, but primarily focuses on the
third.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
Scholars differ in their interpretation of the
four kingdoms. The following chart presents
the traditional view.
The Four Beasts
The Kingdoms they
represent
The first beast - like Babylon
a lion with eagle’s Nebuchadnezzar
wings (7:4)
king (2:36-38).
as
The second beast - The Medeo-Persian
like a bear, raised up Empire created by
on one side (7:5)
Cyrus. (8:3-4, 20)
The third beast - like
a leopard with four
wings
and
four
heads (7:6)
The Greek Empire
with Alexander the
Great as early leader.
(8:5-8, 21-22)
The fourth beast - The Roman Empire
unlike any natural (circa 60 BC)
animal, yet more
frightening,
more
powerful and more
destructive.
The first beast, which looks like a lion,
represents
Babylon
(2:36-38). 190
Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, is
compared to a lion in Jeremiah 4:7 and
50:17. The king, the nation and its armies
are compared to eagles in Jeremiah 4:13;
48:40; 49:22; Ezekiel 17:3; Habakkuk
1:8. 191 The winged lion was also a familiar
motif in Babylonian art. 192 The image
represents the great speed and power of a
nation whose army was conquering new
lands. The description of the beast is similar
to the humbling and restoration of
Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 4.
The second beast, which looks like a bear,
represents the Medio-Persian Empire. The
description of the bear lying down but raised
on one side may suggest that the bear is
ready to attack. Another possibility is that
the raised side represents Persia as the
dominant party of the two country kingdom.
The three ribs in the bear’s mouth suggests
34
the voracious appetite of the bear. Some
commentators give interpret the three ribs
differently. 193 The Medo-Persian empire
expanded to control more territory than any
other empire before its time, from the Egypt
on the west to the Indus River on the east. 194
The third beast, which looks like a leopard,
represents the Greek Empire. It has fourwings and four heads.
The four wings
represent “the four quarters of the earth.”
This Empire was known for the quick way
that it conquered the known world at that
time. Its army, under Alexander the Great,
conquered Persia in 334 B.C. 195 Some
scholars think that the four heads represent
the four generals who divided up
Alexander’s empire after he died. 196 Others
think the four heads symbolize the four
winds of heaven. 197 In other words, the four
heads represent the ambition of the empire
to conquer the whole world. 198
The fourth beast is not like any natural
animal or any of the previous beasts. Each
of the previous beasts were a hybred, a
mixture of different animals. Hill describes
them as mutant and particularly malignant
human kingdoms. 199 These images would
have been repulsive to the Jewish people
and contrary to God’s creation. 200 The
difference of the fourth animal makes it all
the more terrifying, as “the beast is a new
kind of terror—something for which there is
no known analogy or antecedent.” 201 It is
frightening and destructive.
The fourth beast has great iron teeth and ten
horns. 202 The iron teeth symbolizes its
ability to crush and devour its enemies. In
the Old Testament times a horn was a
symbol of power and strength. The fourth
beast had ten horns, implying unsurpassed
power.
The ten horns may signify ten kings or
kingdoms, a confederation of kingdoms, or
it may symbolize complete power and rule
over the earth. The fourth kingdom crushes
all other kingdoms (2:40-43) but towards
the end it becomes divided and weak (2:33,
41-43).
Consultant Notes on Daniel
The fourth beast is not given a name.
However a number of factors support the
view that the fourth beast symbolizes the
historical Roman Empire. First, the image
of the goat in Daniel 8 identifies the third
beast as the Greek Empire. Given that the
Roman empire followed Greece historically,
it is likely to be the fourth world empire.
Secondly, it is in the “days of those kings”
(2:44) of the fourth kingdom that the
kingdom of God is set up. 203 The dream
indicates that the fourth kingdom is
shattered at the inauguration of the fifth
kingdom (2:34, 44a). The stone which
struck the iron and clay feet of the image
and brought an end to its dominion. Jesus
understood his first advent as inaugurating
the kingdom of God. Since the first coming
of Jesus occurred during the first-century
Roman Empire, the fifth kingdom begins
with the first advent of Christ. Jesus also
quoted Daniel 7:13 (with Psalm 110:1) when
he replied to the high priest Caiaphas who
had asked if Jesus was the Christ. Jesus’s
answer shows that he understood his
enthronement as happening at his first
coming. 204 Finally, the description in Daniel
11:40-45 corresponds well with the Roman
Empire. 205
1. The interpretation of the fourth beast as
Rome is the view found in early Jewish
literature. 206 The early Jewish interpreters
also favored the Roman view, including
Josephus and the Talmud. This has also
been the historical interpretation of the
church. For example, this was the view of
Irenaeus, Hippolytus and Origen and other
early Christian scholars. 207 Recent scholars
who follow this view include J. Calvin, 208 E.
J. Young, 209 J. Baldwin, 210 P. Gentry, 211 and
Jason S. DeRouchie, 212 Jason Thomas
Parry. 213
2. Some commentators
take a futurist
interpretation of the fourth beast of Daniel’s
vision. Those who follow this view interpret
the final empire as a restored or
reconstituted Roman Empire (after a gap)
sometime in the future. This last and final
empire
represents the empire of the
Antichrist. 214 Some who follow this view
35
include A. Steinmann, 215 Stephen Miller, 216
Jim Hamilton, 217 and Dale Davis. 218
3. Perhaps a majority of modern critical
scholars interpret the fourth beast of Daniel
7 as Greek Empire. Those who follow this
view consider the second beast to be the
Median Empire and third beast the Persian
Empire. They interpret the small horn in
Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 as having the same
referent. They consider the “little horn” to
be the Seleucid king Antiochus IV
Epiphanes, who persecuted the Jews during
the second century B.C. Among those who
hold this view are J. Collins, 219 E. Lucas, 220
J. Goldingay, 221 S. Storms, A. Lacocque, 222
R. J. M. Gurney, 223 and John Walton. 224
4. Some commentators think that the
identity of the four kingdoms is secondary if
not allusive. As a result, they interpret the
four images as symbolic of the course of
history in general from the Babylon Empire
to the climax of history. These scholars
propose a gradual deterioration from one
one kingdom to the next. Following this
view the four empire scheme is more
important than the identification of its parts.
See the discussion in J. Goldingay, 225 also
Tremper Longmann III, 226 and Iain M.
Duguid. 227
5. Some commentators suggest that there are
direct links between the images of the beasts
and animal imagery found in the ANE
culture and ancient mythological literature.
However, Hartman and Di Lella argue that
there is no reason to think that Daniel
directly borrowed these motifs from an ANE
background. 228 Goldingay adds that the
search for the origin of these images
“explain their significance…the sea and
animals stand here not for otherworldly
cosmic or cosmogonic chaos forces but for
historical ones.” 229
Paragraph 7:8
Daniel 7:8 begins a new topic. It describes a
new horn, a small one, that grew among the
ten horns on the fourth beast. A number of
Consultant Notes on Daniel
English versions begin a new paragraph at
this verse (NIV84, NIV11, NJB, NCV,
NET08, NLT07). 230
•
7:8a
I considered the horns: The Aramaic verb
that the RSV52 translates considered is
only used here in Daniel. It means, “to
consider, have regard for.” 231 The form
of the verb describes a continuous
action. 232 English versions translate this
verb in two ways:
•
Use a verb that means, “to think,
consider” (NRSV89, GW, NCV,
NIV84, CEV95, NCV,
GW,
REB89). For example:
I was considering
(NRSV89, Steinmann)
the
horns
-OR-
While I was thinking about the
horns (NIV84, NIV11, GW, NCV)
-OR-
As I was contemplating the horns
(NET08. Lucas, )
•
Use a verb that means, “to look at”
(NJB, NJPS85, TEV, NLT96, TH on
Daniel).
-OR-
As I was looking at the horns
(NLT96, NLT07)
-OR-
While I was staring at the horns
(TEV)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Interpretation (2) is also good. Translate
in a way that is most natural in your
language.
7:8b
and behold: See the Notes on “behold” at
7:2, 5a; 7a. and “lo” at 7:6a. 233 The
Aramaic word that the RSV52 translates
behold often introduces something that is
unexpected or surprising. It is also used
to introduce a dream or a new part of a
dream. Here it introduces a climax of the
first part of the vision of the four
beasts. 234
36
If your language has a special way
to introduce a new part in a dream,
you may use it here.
English
versions translate this in a variety of
ways:
and behold (NASB, KJV, RSV52,
ESVUS16, Steinmann, Collins,
Lucas)
-OR-
suddenly…appeared
NLT07)
(NLT96,
-OR-
there before me (NIV84, NIV11,
Goldingay)
-OR-
there appeared (REB89,
•
If your language has no special way
to introduce a dream, you may omit
this word in your translation. Most
English versions do not translate it
(NRSV89, GW, REB89, TEV,
CEV95, NJPS85, NET08).
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
there came up among them another horn,
a little one: See the Notes at 7:3a. Here
the verb describes a completed action. 235
In some languages it may be more
natural to change the order of the words.
For example:
another horn – a small one – came
up between them (NET08)
-OR-
another small horn appeared among
them (NLT07)
-OR-
there before me was another horn, a
little one, which came up among
them (NIV11)
Some modern versions use a verb that
describes how plants come up from the
ground. This would accord with the verb
“plucked up” in 7:8c. For example:
another horn grew up among them.
It was a little horn… (NCV)
-OR-
a new little horn sprouted among
them (NJPS85)
Translate the verb in a way that is natural
in your language.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
a little one: See the Notes on the word
horn at 7:7e. The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates a little one means,
“small.” 236 It refers to a small horn.
This horn was smaller than the ten other
horns. Other ways to translate this are:
a new horn, a smaller one 237
-OR-
a smaller horn
7:8c
before which three of the first horns were
plucked up by the roots: This is a
passive clause. In some languages it may
be more natural to translate this as an
active clause. The subject is uncertain.
There are at least two possibilities:
(a) The subject is the small horn. This
is supported by 7:24. As the small
horn sprouted it uprooted three of the
other horns.
It uprooted three of the other horns
(GW) 238
-OR-
It tore out three of the horns that
were already there (TEV)
-OR-
The little horn pulled out three of
the other horns (NCV)
(b) The subject is indefinite. The focus
is not on the subject of the action.
Someone plucked up three of the
other horns
-OR-
They (indefinite) pulled up three of
the other horns
The first option is best. Translate in a
way that is natural in your language. In
some languages it may be necessary to
add implied information. For example:
It uprooted three of the previous
horns to make room for it.
Because this is a vision, it is best to keep
the figurative language. However, in
some languages that may not be possible.
If that is true in your language, you may
be able to say:
37
It completely destroyed three of the
other horns as it appeared.
plucked up by the roots: The Aramaic
verb that the RSV52 translates plucked
up by the roots
means, “to be
plucked” 239 or “uprooted.” 240 The action
normally refers to the way a person
would pull up a plant with its roots. Here
it is used in a metaphorical way to mean,
“to completely destroy or remove.” It is
usually best to keep the figurative
language if possible.
7:8d
and behold: See the Notes at 7:8a. The
author uses this phrase two times in this
verse. This adds emphasis and signals
that this is the climax of the vision about
the four beasts. 241
(a) Some English versions begin a new
sentence at 7:8a (NRSV89, NIV84,
NRSV89, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
REB89, TEV, CEV95, NJPS85,
NIV84, NIV11, NET08)
(b) Some English versions translate a
connector
(KJV,
RSV52,
ESVUS16)
Translate this clause in a way that is most
natural in your language to introduce a
climactic and astounding event.
in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a
man: Since horns do not usually have
eyes, you may have to translate this idea
differently: For example:
There were eyes like human eyes on
the horn.
-OR-
There were eyes in this horn, like
those of a man (NJPS85)
-OR-
In this horn I saw eyes like human
eyes (NJB)
-OR-
This little horn had eyes like human
eyes (NLT96)
-OR-
This horn had human eyes (TEV)
Translate this clause in a way that is most
natural in your language. The fact that
Consultant Notes on Daniel
the horn had eyes and a mouth, implies
that the horn symbolized a person.
38
arrogantly
NJPS85)
(NRSV89,
NLT96,
-OR-
man: In this context the word man
refers to humankind in general. The horn
had eyes like a human.
proudly (TEV)
-OR-
with great pride (CEV95)
-OR-
7:8c
bragging (NCV)
and: Daniel 7:8b and 7:8c are closely
connected. The Aramaic connector that
the RSV52 translates and is . In this
context, it introduces a clause that
describes a second aspect of the little
horn. Most English versions translate a
connector
boastfully (NIV84)
-OR-
and (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
REB89, TEV, CEV95, NCV,
NIV84, NIV11, NJPS85, NET08)
Translate in a way that is natural in your
language.
a mouth speaking great things: The
Aramaic verb that the RSV52 translates
speaking
describes
a
continuous
action. 242
a mouth speaking great things
(Steinmann, Collins)
-OR-
a mouth that was making great
claims (Lucas)
-OR-
a mouth making great statements
(Goldingay) 243
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
great things: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates great was used in 7:3,
7 to describe an object that was very
large. In this context, the word is used
figuratively. English versions translate it
in at least two ways.
(1) It can have a neutral sense (RSV52)
making great claims 244
-OR-
spoke impressive things (GW)
-OR-
making great statements 245
(2) It can have a negative sense.
Both interpretations are good. However,
in this context the phrase may have a
neutral sense and then later have a
negative sense in 7:11, 20, 25. 246
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
General Comment on the Little Horn:
Daniel describes the fourth beast as having
ten horns (7:7). In the Old Testament the
image of a horn often symbolized the power
and authority to rule. By metonymy, the
horn could also refer to the person who had
the power and authority to rule. Daniel 7:8
introduces a little horn which rose from the
midst of ten horns. In the process three of
the other horns were uprooted. Like the
three beasts before it, the fourth beast
represents symbolically both the king and its
kingdom. The small horn represents the
figure of the fourth beast as a whole.
Like the ten other horns, the little horn
represents a king, yet he is a king who is
different from the other kings (7:24). Daniel
describes the little horn as having eyes like
the eyes of a man and a mouth that spoke
great things (7:8). The image of eyes like
the eyes of a man may imply that the king
had great powers of observation and great
intelligence. 247 The description introduces a
sense of fear and foreboding. 248
The little horn is also described as
speaking great things (7:8). Later we learn
that he will speak words against God the
Most High. He is also depicted as
persecuting the saints of the Most High
(7:21, 25). He rewrites the rules and time
for things. He will also have power over
God’s people for a time, times and a half a
Consultant Notes on Daniel
time. In the end the Ancient of Days will
judge him and take away his power to rule.
The little horn will be killed and his body
destroyed and burned with fire (7:11). The
ancient of Days will then give dominion to
the saints of the Most High who will reign
forever (7:26).
Scholars interpret the symbolic meaning of
the little horn in different ways”
1. Some commentators contend that
the little horn in Daniel 7 represents
the same person as the little horn in
Daniel 8. Following this view, the
little horn is a symbolic image of
Antiochus Epiphanes and his actions
against the Jewish people in the 2d
century B.C. (J.A. Montgomery,
Hartman and Di Lella, John J.
Collins,
S.
Storm,
Thomas
McComiskey, John Goldingay,
Ernest Lucas).
2. Some commentators argue that the
little horn in Daniel 7 represents
someone or some people who lived
during the fourth kingdom, that is,
the Roman Empire. Some have
identified the horn as Vespasian,
the high priest or zealots. 249
Following this view, the kingdom of
God is inaugurated with the first
coming of the Jesus the Messiah.
(J. Parry, P. Gentry, 250 M.R.
Adamthwaite).
3. Some commentators argue that the
little horn in Daniel 7 represents a
future Antichrist who will arise at
the end of time. James Hamilton
suggests that there is a typological
pattern. 251 The little horn in Daniel
8 represents Antiochus Epiphanes of
the 2d century B.C. He adds that the
contemptible person in Daniel 11
represents the same figure. This
pattern is then repeated again with
the little horn from the fourth
kingdom. The pattern repeats and
reaches a climax with the
appearance of the Antichrist at the
end of time. At that time God’s
39
people will be delivered at the
second coming of Christ. 252
(Jerome, J. Hamilton, Dale Davis,
R. Showers, L. Wood, J. Wavoord,
C. F. Keil, H. C. Leupold, E .J.
Young, G. Archer, S. R. Miller)
4. Some commentators argue that it is
best not to try to identify the four
beasts as particular evil empires in
history. They say that it is better to
interpret the beasts symbolically as
representing an unknown number of
evil empires which will succeed
each other from the time of the
Babylonian Exile to the end of
history. 253 These commentators
emphasize that the focus of Daniel 7
is really about the coming day of
divine judgment when God will win
the final victory over all evil. 254 In
other words, there will always be
conflict between good and evil in
the world, but God will prove
victorious in the end and his
kingdom will endure forever. 255 (I.
Duguid, R. Wallace, T. Longman).
Paragraph 7:9-10
In Daniel 7:9 the vision changes from a
description of the beasts coming out of the
sea to a court setting. Daniel saw someone
called Ancient of Days sitting on a throne.
A number of English versions begin a new
paragraph at this verse (NIV84, NIV11,
TEV, CEV95, NCV, NRSV89, GW,
NLT96, NLT07, NET08). 256 Some versions
also have a new heading at this verse (TEV,
CEV95, NRSV89, ESVUS16). See the
introduction to the Notes for how you might
include a new heading here.
The author wrote 7:9b-10 in poetic form.
English versions show this in different ways,
such as indenting these verses or by
presenting the verses in a special way. You
should present this poetry in same way you
did the poetry in 2:20-23; 4:34-35; 5:25-28;
Consultant Notes on Daniel
6:26-27. Hebrew poetry is usually written in
pairs of parallel lines.
7:9a
As I looked: See the Notes at 7:4b. The
Aramaic phrase that the RSV52
translates As I looked is literally, “I was
seeing until that.”
The verb form
describes a continuous action. This new
scene begins in an uninterrupted way.
Examples of how English versions
translate this are:
As I was looking (REB89)
-OR-
while I watched (TEV)
-OR-
I kept watching until ..
-OR-
placed, be set up.” 261 The author did not
think it was important to say who set up
the thrones. Another way to translate
this in English is:
installed 262
-OR-
were set in place (Goldingay)
7:9c
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is .
This
connector introduces the second line of a
pair of clauses in Hebrew poetic form.
The event in 7:9c is closely related to the
event in 7:9b. Both lines share similar
information. English versions show this
connection in different ways:
•
I continued to watch… 257
40
-OR-
I continued to look… (Steinmann)
Most English versions translate a
connector.
and (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89, GW,
NLT96, REB89, CEV95, NCV,
NJB, NIV84).
7:9b-c
These two verse parts are in Hebrew poetic
form. The two lines parallel each other.
7:9b
thrones were placed: This is a passive
clause. In some languages it may be
more natural to translate this in an active
form. For example:
They (indefinite) set thrones in place
-OR-
Someone set up thrones
-OR-
Someone
thrones 258
was
installing
the
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language. Note that the agent of
the action is not in focus.
thrones: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates thrones refers to a
special chair on which a ruler sits and
rules his kingdom. 259 In this context the
word is in the plural. There was more
than one throne. These thrones may have
been thrones for judges to sit on. 260
placed: The Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates placed means, “to be
•
Some English versions also show the
connection by indenting the two lines
(RSV52,
NRSV89,
ESVUS16,
CEV95, NIV84, NIV11, NET08,
NJB, NLT07).
Use a method that is natural in your
language to show the close connection
between these two verse parts.
one that was ancient of days took his seat:
There are different ways to translate this
clause in English:
Then one who was ancient of days
sat down on his throne.
-OR-
Then one who had lived from
ancient times sat down on his
throne
-OR-
Then one who had lived forever sat
down on his throne to judge.
ancient of days: The Aramaic phrase
that the RSV52 translates ancient of days
means, “one who is old of days.” 263 It is
an unusual phrase. It is indefinite. It
refers to someone who was very old,
Consultant Notes on Daniel
even eternal. 264 English versions translate
this phrase in different ways.
(1) The phrase refers to a person who
had lived an extremely long time,
even forever.
one that was ancient of days
(RSV52)
-OR-
[one] ancient in days
-OR-
someone who was ancient 265
-OR-
one who had been living forever
(TEV, BIMK)
(2) Most English versions translate this
phrase as a title with a definite
article. Most English versions
capitalize the name to show that it
refers to God.
the Ancient One (NLT96, NLT07,
Lucas)
-OR-
the Ancient in Years (REB89)
-OR-
one
advanced
(Goldingay) 267
sat down (GW)
-OR-
sat down on one of the thrones
(TEV) 270
-OR-
an Ancient of
Collins, Cook)
Days
(NJPS85,
-OR-
an Ancient One (NRSV89)
(4) Some versions translate explicitly
that this title refers to God
the Eternal God (CEV95, CEVUS06)
-OR-
God, the Eternal One (NCV)
(5) The phrase refers to an old person.
an old man 266
-OR-
one most venerable (NJB)
years
took his seat: The Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates took his seat means,
“to be seated, take one’s place.” 269 The
Ancient of Days sat on one of the
thrones. English versions translate this
in different ways:
the Ancient One, who has lived for
endless years (GW)
(3) The phrase is a title, however, the
person is indefinite. It is the first time
this person is introduced in the text.
The title is determined in verses 13
and 22.
in
Option (1) is recommended. The phrase
introduces God but in an indefinite and
descriptive way. The phrase describes
him in terms of his very great age. The
phrase also implies that he was worthy
of respect. It implies wisdom, dignity and
authority. 268 The verses that follow help
to clarify the identity of this person. The
phrase refers to Yahweh, the covenant
God of Israel. The next two references to
this person are written with the definite
article.
-OR-
the Ancient of Days (NET08,
NIV84,
ESVUS16,
NIV11,
Steinmann)
41
-OR-
sat down on his throne (NCV)
Some versions also translate the implied
purpose why he sat there.
sat down to judge (NLT96)
You may add this information if readers
do not understand why he sat down.
7:9d-e
These two verse parts are in Hebrew poetic
form. The two lines are parallel to each
other.
7:9d
In Daniel 7:9d, Daniel begins a new topic.
He described the appearance of the Ancient
of Days. It is best to begin this verse part as
a new sentence.
his raiment was white as snow: Daniel
began to describe the person called the
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
Ancient of Days.
English versions
translate this differently.
his clothing was white as snow
(NRSV89, ESVUS16, similarly
NLT96, NLT07, NIV84, NIV11)
-OR-
His clothes were white as snow
(TEV, NCV, similarly GW,
Steinmann)
-OR-
His clothing was like white snow
(Lucas, Goldingay)
-OR-
his robe was white as snow (REB89,
NJB)
-OR-
He had clothes that were as white as
snow 271
The white color probably symbolized
purity or righteousness. 272 You may
want to put this information in a
footnote.
raiment: The word raiment is an old
English word that means, “clothing.” It
is a general word that could refer any
kind of clothes a person might wear. See
the Notes on the word “garment” in
3:21b. Other ways that English translate
this are:
clothes (TEV, NCV, GW)
-OR-
clothing
(CEV95,
NRSV89,
ESVUS16,
NLT96, NLT07,
NIV84, NIV11)
-OR-
robe (REB89, NJB)
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
snow: Daniel compared the color of the
person’s clothes to snow. In some places
people may not be familiar with snow. 273
If that is true in your language;
(a) you may substitute a different object
that people in your region consider
very white.
(b) you may choose not to translate the
figure and simply say:
extremely white
42
very white
If people do not know about snow in
your culture, see KBT on how to translate
new ideas. Of course it is important that
the word you choose does not conflict
with the symbolic meaning of ‘purity’ or
‘righteousness.’
7:9e
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is .
In this
context, it introduces a verse part that
parallels 7:9d. Daniel described another
aspect of the person called “ancient of
days.” See the Notes on and at 7:9c.
the hair of his head like pure wool: In
some languages it may be more natural to
add the implied verb “was.”
For
example:
the hair on his head was white like
wool (NIV84)
-OR-
and the hair was white as pure
wool 274
of his head: In some languages this
phrase may be redundant. If that is true
in your language, you may simply
translate hair.
pure wool: The Aramaic phrase that the
RSV52 translates wool refers to the soft,
curly hair of sheep. There are different
kinds of wool. Daniel described the
person’s hair as pure or clean wool. 275
This metaphor implies that he was a
very wise person.
If “white hair”
indicates “wisdom” in your language,
you may use the metaphor here. 276
English versions translate this differently.
(1) Some versions translate “white.”
White hair symbolizes wisdom. 277
whitest wool (NLT96)
-OR-
white like wool (NIV84, NIV11,
NCV)
(2) Some versions translate “pure”
wool. 278 In this case his hair might
symbolize purity and holiness.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
pure
wool
(TEV,
NRSV89,
Steinmann, similarly NJB) 279
(3) Some versions translate “washed.”
Lucas suggests that it might refer
here
to
“brightness”
and
“splendor.” 280
washed wool 281
-OR-
clean wool (Lucas)
(4) Similar to the note above, other
versions focus on its softness.
Others, like Goldingay think it
refers to brightness, and therefore
nobility, splendor and glory.
lambs’ wool (NJPS85, REB89,
NET08, Collins, Goldingay)
(5)
Kaufmann argues that the verb has
the sense “to libate” and the phrase
means, “as the wool of a sacrificial
lamb.” 282
Interpretation (1) is recommended. It
may also be possible to combine
interpretations (1) and (2).
and his hair was as white as pure
wool.
Some languages may not have a word
that means “wool” or people may not
know that lamb’s wool is white. If that is
true in your language you may:
(a) substitute a different object that
people in your region consider very
white.
(b) choose not to translate the figure
and simply say:
extremely white
-OR-
very white
In other languages the metaphor (e.g.
“white hair”) may not imply wisdom. If
that is true in your language, you may be
able translate the meaning directly. For
example:
and he looked very wise
For more help on how to translate new
ideas see KBT. Translate this idea in a
43
way that is most natural in your
language.
7: 9f-g
Daniel 7:9f does not begin with a connector.
It is usually best to begin a new sentence.
The two verse parts are in Hebrew poetic
form. The information in the two lines is
parallel to each other.
7:9f
his throne was fiery flames:
Daniel
compared the throne to flames of fire.
English versions differ in how they
interpret this clause.
(1) Daniel described the throne as
consisting or made of fire. Most
English versions translate this way
(RSV52, NRSV89, GW, REB89,
NJPS85, CEV95). 283 For example:
His throne was a blazing fire
(CEV95)
-OR-
His throne was flames of fire
(Lucas, Steinmann, Collins)
-OR-
His throne was made from fire
(NCV)
-OR-
His throne
(ESVUS16)
was
fiery
flames
-OR-
His throne was flashes of flame
(Goldingay)
(2) Daniel compared the throne to
flames of fire
His throne was like flames of fire. 284
(3) His throne was burning with fire.
His throne was flaming with fire
(NIV84)
-OR-
His throne was ablaze with fire
(NET08)
-OR-
His throne … was blazing with fire
(TEV)
(4) His throne shined like fire.
His throne was flashes of flame
285
Consultant Notes on Daniel
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Interpretation (2) is also good. Be
careful not to imply that the fire was
destroying the throne.
fiery flames: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates fiery flames is literally,
“flames of fire.” 286 Lucas notes that fire
is a common symbol for God’s presence.
He suggests that in this context the
metaphor symbolizes “awesome and
dangerous splendour” and perhaps also
the idea of a destructive judgment.” 287
Longman also suggests that the fire may
symbolize judgment. 288 Other ways
English versions translate this are:
flames of fire (REB89)
-OR-OR-
its wheels were a burning fire (NJB)
-OR-
its wheels were blazing fire (Lucas)
(2) Daniel compared the wheels to fire.
fiery wheels (TEV, CEV95)
-OR-
Its wheels were like a burning fire
(3) The wheels were burning with fire.
the wheels of his throne were
blazing with fire (NCV)
-OR-
and its wheels were all ablaze
(NIV84)
the wheels shined like burning
fire 289
blazing fire (CEV95)
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
7:9g
The Aramaic text does not have a connector.
However, the meaning of 7:9g is closely
related to 7:9f. In 7:9g Daniel described the
wheels of the throne as burning fire. In 7:9f
he describes the throne like flames of fire.
English language versions translate the
connection differently.
(a) Some English versions translate a
connector
-OR-
with (NLT96, CEV95)His throe was
made from fire
a
coma
a
Interpretation (1) is recommended. Be
careful not to imply that the fire was
destroying the wheels.
wheels: 290 Thrones do not usually have
wheels. In this context, the image may be
something like the chariot throne in
Ezekiel 1-3.
burning fire: The Aramaic word that
the RSV52 translates burning fire is a
synonym to the word “fiery flames” in
7:9f. 291 Another way to translate this in
English is:
blazing fire (NJPS85,
REB89, CEV95)
and (NIV84, REB89, NCV)
(c) Some translate
(NJPS85)
(1) The wheels were actually fire (NJB,
GW, NLT96, REB89, NRSV89
NJPS85).
(4) Its wheels shinned like a fire.
a blaze of flames (NJB)
(b) Some translate
NRSV89, GW
44
(NJB,
semi-colon
Translate the connection in a way that is
most natural in your language.
its wheels were burning fire: English
versions translate this differently:
NLT96,
Translate this in a way that is natural in
your language. It is usually best to try to
keep the metaphor here. However, if the
metaphor communicates wrong meaning,
you may need to try to make the meaning
explicit. It has been noted above that
scholars differ in the way they have
interpreted the metaphor. For example,
some consider the metaphor to refer to
the splendor or brightness of God’s
presence. Others think it refers to God’s
coming in judgment. The Notes suggests
the metaphor symbolizes God coming to
judge.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
7:10a-b
was gushing
These two verse parts are poetically parallel
to each other. There are at least two ways to
translate these two parts.
(a) You can translate the two parts
separately.
(b) You can combine the verse parts
and translate them together. Most
modern English versions do this. See
the Comment at the end of 7:10b.
7:10a
This verse does not begin with a connector.
However, the verse continues the theme of
fire. English versions begin the verse
differently:
(1) Begin a new sentence (KJV,
RSV52, NRSV89, NCV, NJPS85,
NJB, NIV84, GW)
and (TEV, CEV95, NLT96)
was rushing out
-OR-
was surging forth (Goldingay)
7:10b
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . It connects
7:10b closely with 7:10a. This new
clause explains something else about the
fire. Translate the connector in a way
that is natural in your language.
came forth from before him: The clause is
literally, “going out from before him.”
The verb expresses continuing action.
Other ways translate this into English
are:
coming out from
(NIV84, NIV11)
before
him
-OR-
-OR-
(2) is
a stream of fire issued: Most English
versions translate this as stream of fire or
“river of fire” (RSV, RSV89, ESVUS16,
NIV84, NIV11, GW, REB89, NLT96,
NLT07,
NCV, NET08, NJPS85,
GNTD). However, in some languages it
may not be natural to use the word
stream or “river” when describing fire.
If that is true in your language you may
be able to say:
fire was coming out like water
flowing in a stream
-OR-
Fire rushed like water flowing down
a stream
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
issued: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates issued means, “to flow,
gush.” 292 The action is continuous. 293
Other ways to translate this are:
was flowing (NASB, NIV84)
-OR-
issuing from his presence (Lucas,
Goldingay)
(2) Use a connector
Either interpretation (1) or
acceptable.
45
and proceeding from his presence
(NET08)
-OR-
Flowing from his presence (NLT07)
-OR-
It was coming out from the Ancient
of Days
Most modern English versions combine
this verse part with 7:10a. See the
Comments at the end of 7:10b.
and came forth: The Aramaic word that
the RSV52 translates came forth means,
“to go out.” 294 This is a synonym to the
word issued. The action is continuous.
You can say:
coming out (NIV84)
from before him: The Aramaic phrase
that the RSV52 translates from before
him explains the place from where the
river started. 295
Scholars have
interpreted the third person pronoun him
in different ways.
(1) It refers to the person on the throne
(NRSV89, GW, NJB, REB89). 296
Consultant Notes on Daniel
from his presence (NRSV89,
NET08, NLT07, Lucas, Goldingay)
46
NJPS85, NET08, NJB, NIV84, NIV11,
GW).
-OR-
from him (GW)
(2) It refers to a place in front of the
person. 297
from in front of him (NCV)
-OR-
from before him (ESVUS16,
NIV84, NIV11, Steinmann, Collins)
(3) It refers to the throne.
from it (TEV)
(4) It refers to the space around the
person.
from all around him (CEVUS06)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
him: The Aramaic pronoun that the
RSV52 translates him is masculine and
could refer back to either the Ancient of
Days or his throne. Here it probably
refers to the person.
Comment on 7:10a-b: The Aramaic text
uses two verbs that are similar in meaning.
In some languages it may be more natural to
use one verb and combine 7:10a and 7:10b.
For example:
and a river of fire was flowing from
him
-OR-
and a stream of fire was pouring out
from him
-OR-
and fire was pouring out from him
like water flows in a stream
Translate this idea in a way that is natural in
your language.
a thousand thousands served him: A very
great number of angels were serving the
Ancient of Days.
English versions
translate this in different ways.
Thousands and
serving him
thousands
were
-OR-
Many thousands of angels were
serving the one on the throne
a thousand thousands: See the Notes
at 5:1. The expression thousand
thousands is a way the Hebrews used to
speak of a very great number. English
versions translate it differently.
(1) It means, “many thousands.”
thousands and thousands (GW)
-OR-
many thousands (TEV, NCV) 298
(2) It means “thousands of thousands.”
a thousand thousands (NRSV89) 299
(3) It means, “millions.” 300
millions (NLT96)
Some languages may not have numbers
that
mean one thousand or many
thousands.
If that is true in your
language, you should use a natural
expression that refers to an extremely
large number.
In some languages it will be necessary to
make the object explicit.
English
versions interpret this differently.
(1) It refers to angels (NLT96)
of angels (NLT96, NLT07, NCV)
7:10c-d
These two verse parts are poetically parallel
to each other.
7:10c
The Aramaic text does not begin with a
connector. In this clause, Daniel described
something new that he saw. It is best to
begin a new sentence (NRSV89, NLT96,
NLT07, NCV, REB89, TEV, CEV95, NCV,
(2) It refers to people 301
of people (TEV)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
served The form of the Aramaic word
that the RSV52 translates served is
different from the verb “to serve” in
7:14b, 27. Here it means, “to serve,
attend to.” 302 English versions translate
the action in different ways.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
(1) Translate a past continuous tense. 303
A hundred thousand were standing
before him in order to serve him
were attending (NASB)
-OR-
-OR-
An even greater number of angels
were standing before him ready to
do whatever he commanded.
were serving (NCV)
-OR-
were ministering (NET08)
(2) Translate a past completed action.
served him (GW, REB89, NRSV89,
RSV52, ESVUS16, Lucas)
-OR-
ministered to him (NLT96, NLT07,
Goldingay, similarly the KJV)
-OR-
attended
Steinmann)
(NIV84,
NIV11,
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
him: The pronoun him refers to the
person on the throne, that is, the Ancient
of Days.
•
•
47
Most English versions translate the
pronoun as a masculine singular
referring to the Ancient of Days.
The title refers to God.
Some
versions make this reference clear by
capitalizing the first letter.
For
example:
Him (NJPS85, NASB)
You will need to discuss with your
translation committee whether it is good
to capitalize pronouns that refer to God.
You will need to be consistent in the way
you do this throughout the Old
Testament.
7:10d
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is .
In this
context, it introduces a verse part that
parallels 7:10c.
ten thousand times ten thousand stood
before him: This clause is parallel to the
one in 7:10c. Not only were there many
who were serving the Ancient of Days
there were even more who were waiting
to receive an order from him. Other
ways to say this are:
ten thousand: The Aramaic word that
the RSV52 translates ten thousand comes
from the word that means, “great.” In
this context, it means, “many, ten
thousand.” The phrase is literally, “ten
thousand, ten thousands.” It was a
Hebrew way of describing an even
greater number than the number in 7:10c.
English versions translate this in different
ways:
•
Some translate it literally as “ten
thousand times ten thousand.”
ten thousand times ten thousand
(KJV, RSV52, NRSV89, GW, NJB)
•
Some translate it as “millions.”
millions (TEV, NCV)
-OR-
tens of millions
304
-OR-
a hundred million (NLT96)
•
Some translate it as a number more
than a person can count.
an uncountable amount 305
As mentioned in 7:10b, some languages
may not have ways to refer to such large
numbers. If that is true in your language,
you should use a natural expression that
refers to an extremely large number that
was even greater than 7:10c.
In some languages it may be necessary to
include the implied object. For example:
(1) The implied object is “angels.” 306
angels (NLT96, NLT07, NCV)
(2) The implied object is “people.” 307
people (TEV)
Interpretation (1) is recommended
stood: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates stood describes a past
continuous sense: “were standing.” 308
Consultant Notes on Daniel
An even greater number of angels were
standing, ready to do whatever the person
on the throne asked them to do. 309
before him: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates before him can have
different meanings. 310 See the Notes at
5:13. In this context, it describes a
situation where a person of low status
comes to serve a person of higher status
or higher authority. English versions
translate this idea in different ways.
(1) The context implies that they were
standing ready to serve the person
on the throne. In some languages it
may be necessary to add this
implied information. For example:
to attend him (NLT96, similarly
NJPS85)
-OR-
ready to serve him (NET08)
-OR-
attending him (NRSV89)
(2) The phrase tells where they were
standing (REB89)
before him (KJV, RSV52, TEV,
NJB, NIV84)
-OR-
in front of him (GW).
Both ideas are correct. The angels were
standing in front of him waiting for him
to give them orders. Translate this
meaning in a way that is most natural in
your language.
7:10e-f
These two verse parts are poetically parallel
to each other.
7:10e
In this verse part, Daniel described
something new that he saw. The Aramaic
clause does not begin with a connector.
Most English versions translate this verse
part as a new sentence (NRSV89, GW,
NLT96, NLT07, NLT11, REB89, NET08,
TEV, CEV95, NCV, NJPS85, NIV84, NJB).
the court sat in judgment: The Aramaic
clause the RSV52 translates the court sat
48
in judgment is literally, “judgment sat.”
English versions interpret this idiom in a
variety of ways.
the members of the court sat
down to judge
-OR-
the judges gathered together in order
to begin to judge
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
the court: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates court can have
different meanings. 311 In this context it
refers to a judicial assembly. 312 English
versions translate this differently:
(1) The word refers to a group that
gathers together to judge.
court (RSV52, NRSV89, ESVUS16,
GW, NLT96, NLT07, TEV, NIV84,
NIV11, NCV, REB89, NJPS85,
NJB)
-OR-
the judges 313
(2) The word refers to an aspect of the
procedure of judging.
judgment (KJV)
-OR-
time of judgment (CEV95)
Interpretation (1) is best.
sat in judgment: The Aramaic word
that the RSV52 translates sat in judgment
is literally “be seated, take one’s place.”
English
versions
translate
this
differently:
(1) The word literally means, “to sit.”
The judges may have sat on the
thrones mentioned in 7:9.
sat (REB89, NJPS85)
-OR-
was seated (NIV84)
-OR-
sat in judgment (RSV52, NRSV89)
(2) The word implies that the judges
were ready “to begin” the judicial
procedure.
convened (GW)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
began its session (NLT96, TEV)
-OR-
began (CEV95)
-OR-
was ready to begin (NCV)
Both ideas are good. The judges would
sit when they were about to do their work
of judging.
7:10f
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is .
In this
context, it introduces a verse part that
continues the thought from 7:10e.
the books were opened: This is a passive
clause. In some languages it may be
more natural to translate this as an active
clause. For example:
They opened the books 314
-OR-
and they opened the record books
books: The context implies that these
books contained the records of what had
taken place during the reign of the four
beasts and information about how people
had acted. 315 The Ancient of Days would
make his judgment based on these
records. If some languages it may be
more natural to translate this word in a
more specific way:
records (Moffat)
-OR-
record books
General Comment on the Ancient of Days:
The vision introduces ancient of days as an
indefinite phrase; an ancient of days took his
seat. Who is this ancient of days? The
phrase is also descriptive. He is the one
who is ancient of days. The phrase implies
that this person had lived an extremely long
time, even an indefinitely long time in the
past. Given his age, he is worthy of respect.
He is wise. His identity becomes clear in
the description that follows. He is Yahweh,
the covenant God of Israel.
49
Daniel 7:9 says that the ancient of days took
his seat on a throne. The text says that there
were many thrones. Some early rabbis
understood that that one throne was for God
and another for David. They understood
that one like a son of man was the coming
Davidic king and that he would be seated on
a throne next to God (Daniel 7:13-14;
Psalms 110:1). 316 In fact, Jesus himself cites
Psalms 110 as referring to himself as
David’s “Lord”: “The LORD says to him,
“Sit at my right hand, until I make your
enemies your footstool.” The text implies
that one of the thrones in Daniel 7:9 was for
him, as the Davidic Messiah.
The ancient of days had clothes as white as
snow and hair like pure wool (7:9). The
parallelism implies that his hair, like “pure
wool,” was a brilliant white like his
clothes. 317 Baldwin says that this image
implies purity (Psalms 51:7). 318 In Isaiah
1:18, the LORD says, “Come now, let us
reason together says the LORD: though your
sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as
snow; though they are red like crimson, they
shall become like wool. The image depicts
the ancient of days as pure, without sin. 319
God’s throne and its wheels are described as
flaming fire (7:9). In fact, fire streamed out
from the throne in front of him. Baldwin
explains that this image was not original to
Daniel: “From the burning bush (Ex. 3:3) to
Malachi’s judgment by fire (Mal. 4:1) fire
frequently depicts God’s presence, or is
pictured as going before Him to prepare for
His coming (Pss 50:3; 97:3).” 320 The image
of fire may also symbolize judgment and
destruction. For example, God goes before
his people as a consuming fire
(Deuteronomy 9:3, Psalms 50:3, 97:3, Isaiah
66:15). 321 No one can enter his presence
except those who belong to him.
Steinmann notes that this image of wheels
“implies mobility: God on his throne of
grace can accompany his people wherever
they go (cf. Is 66:1; Pss 11:4; 103:19).” 322
Surrounding the throne of God are
innumerable attendants: “a thousand
thousands and ten thousand times ten
Consultant Notes on Daniel
thousand.” This phrase is not intended to
give an exact number. Rather, it emphasizes
the extraordinary great number of angels
who were present surrounding the throne to
serve Him.
The description reaches a climax in 7:10.
The members of the court are seated and
ready to render judgment. God’s book of
accounts is open so that the evidence may be
evaluated. In 7:11-12 judgment is
pronounced concerning the four beasts.
Paragraph 7:11-12
In 7:11 there is a change in the scene. The
little horn began to speak in a boastful way.
A number of English versions begin a new
paragraph at this verse (GW, NLT96,
NLT07, TEV, CEV95, NCV, NJPS85,
NIV84, NIV11, NJB).
7:11a
I looked: See the Notes at 7:2, 6a, 7a. The
Aramaic verb that the RSV52 translates
looked is literally, “I was watching.” 323
In this context, it describes a continuous
action. 324 For example:
I continued to watch (GW, NLT96,
NLT07, NIV84, NIV11)
-OR-
I went on watching (REB89, NJB)
-OR-
I kept on looking (NCV)
Translate this verb in a way that is most
natural in your language.
7:11b
then: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates then usually begins a
sentence. In this context, however, it is
unusual. 325 Scholars differ in how they
interpret it.
(1) The connector always
introduces a new sentence. Here it
introduces the next event (NJPS85,
NJB) (which is immediately
interrupted by a reason clause). The
fourth beast was killed.
50
Then, because…, the beast was
killed (NJPS85)
(2) The connector combines with the
following word to introduce a
temporal clause. 326
then
from the time
when
…(Goldingay, Lucas, Collins) 327
(3) The connector introduces the idea
that Daniel kept watching (NIV84,
KJV, RSV52, NRSV89).
Then I continued
…(NIV84)
to
watch
-OR-
Then…I
(REB89)
went
on
watching
Interpretation (1) and (2) are good,
though no major English version follows
(2). Translate the idea in a way that is
most natural in your language. 328
because of: The Aramaic preposition that
the RSV52 translates because is . It
can have different meanings. 329
(1) It introduces a reason why the fourth
beast was killed. (NJPS85, NJB)
because of the arrogant words that
the horn spoke, the beast was killed
(NJPS85)
It may be possible to use a
connector at the beginning of 7:11c
to show that it is the result of 7:11b.
(2) It means, “from.”
from the time when … (Goldingay,
Lucas, Collins) 330
(3) It explains the reason why Daniel
kept watching (KJV, RSV52,
NRSV89, ESVUS16, GW, NET08,
CEV95, NCV, NIV84, NLT96,
NLT07, Steinmann).
I continued to watch because of the
boastful words… (NIV84, NIV11)
(4) It introduces a main clause
I could still hear the little horn
bragging (TEV)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. The
text implies that the judges met and
Consultant Notes on Daniel
condemned the fourth beast to death
because of the way the little horn was
boasting.
the sound of the great words which the
horn was speaking: English versions
differ in the way they interpret this
clause.
Translate this phrase in a way that is
most natural in your language.
horn: This word refers to the little horn
that Daniel saw in the vision at 7:8. See
the Note there for how to translate this
symbol.
little horn (TEV, NCV)
-OR-
(1) The clause puts emphasis on the
words that the little horn spoke.
the little horn was bragging (NCV)
-OR-
the arrogant words that the horn
spoke (NJPS85)
(2) Emphasis is on the noise that the
little horn was making. Daniel
continued to watch because the little
horn continued to boast with a loud
voice.
the sound of the great words that the
horn was speaking (ESVUS16)
-OR-
the noise of the arrogant words that
the horn was speaking
-OR-
I could hear the little horn’s boastful
speech (NLT96)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. The
fourth beast was killed because of the
words the little horn spoke.
sound: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates sounds can have two
meanings. It can refer to a voice or a
sound. 331 In this context both are correct.
Daniel heard the little horn boasting with
a loud voice.
great words: See the Notes at 7:8c. In
this context, the phrase is used
figuratively in a negative sense: The little
horn was boasting. English versions
translate this in different ways:
boastful speech (NLT96, NLT11)
51
smaller horn (CEV95)
was speaking: The Aramaic verb that
the RSV52 translates was speaking
describes a continuous action. 332 The
little horn first began to boast in 7:8c.
7:11b
And as I looked: See the Notes at 7:4b..
The Aramaic phrase that the RSV52
translates And as I looked is literally, “I
was looking until ...” The phrase repeats
the clause in 7:11a. Daniel continued to
look at what was happening. 333 The
repetition adds suspense and gives
emphasis to the statement that follows.
English versions translate this clause in
different ways.
as I watched (NRSV89, TEV, NJB)
-OR-
I was watching until (NET08)
-OR-
I kept looking until… (NIV84,
NIV11, Steinmann)
-OR-
I kept watching until (NLT96,
NLT07, similarly NCV)
the beast was slain: This is a passive
clause. In some languages it may be
more natural to translate it as an active
clause. In some languages one may be
able to use an indefinite third person
subject.
They/one (indefinite)
fourth beast
killed
-OR-
-OR-
arrogant words (NRSV89)
They/one killed the fourth beast
-OR-
bragging and boasting (TEV)
-OR-
bragging (CEV95)
the
However, the indefinite form may imply
that the agent of the action is unknown
and that is not the case. The series of
passive verbs imply divine action based
on the verdict that was given by the
Consultant Notes on Daniel
heavenly court: This is true for each of
verbs in the series: “was killed…was
destroyed…was given….” 334 In some
languages it may be necessary to make
the agent explicit although the action is
indirect. For example:
The Ancient of Days ordered his
angels to kill the fourth beast
-ORThe Ancient of Days condemned
the beast to death
the beast: This is the fourth beast that
Daniel described in 7:7.
As noted
previously, for each of the four kingdoms
the king represents his kingdom. Here
the eleventh horn represents the fourth
kingdom. Both he and his kingdom are
destroyed. It is important to make the
identity of this beast clear in the
translation. For example:
fourth beast (NLT96, NLT07, TEV,
CEV95, NCV)
-OR-
fourth creature
The fourth beast symbolizes the fourth
kingdom and its leader. It is clear that to
kill the fourth beast means that all those
who are members of the fourth kingdom
or who follow its king will be put to
death.
slain: The Aramaic verb that the RSV52
translates slain means, “killed.”
Comment on 7:11b-c: In some languages it
may be more natural to reverse the clauses
and put the reason last. For example:
Then, as I watched, they (indefinite)
killed the beast, because the little
horn spoke arrogantly.
52
(2) Some English versions translate a
connector. After they (indefinite)
killed the beast, they destroyed its
body with fire. Most English version
have “and.”
and (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, TEV, CEV95, NIV84,
NIV11, NET08, NJB)
Translate this connector in a way that is
most natural in your language.
its body destroyed: It is a passive clause.
In some languages it may be more
natural to translate this as an active
clause using a third person indefinite
form. For example:
they/one (indefinite) destroyed its
body 337
As noted above, the series of passive
verbs imply divine action based on the
verdict that was given by the heavenly
court. 338 In some languages it may be
necessary to make the agent explicit even
though the action is indirect.
For
example:
and ordered his body destroyed
-OR-
The Ancient of Days ordered his
body destroyed
body: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates body can refer to either
a living body (3:27, 4:33, 5:21) or a dead
body. Here it refers to a dead body.
Another way to say this in English is:
carcass (REB89)
destroyed: 339
In this context, the
Aramaic word that the RSV52 translates
destroyed means, “to utterly destroy” or
“completely destroy.”
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is .
English
versions translate the connector in two
ways:
Again the fourth beast symbolizes the
fourth kingdom and its leader. To
destroy the fourth beast’s body would
imply to destroy the fourth kingdom Its
influence and power would be
completely disappear.
(1) Some English versions begin a new
sentence 335 or use a semi-colon
(NJPS85). 336
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . English
versions translate this differently.
7:11d
Consultant Notes on Daniel
(1) It introduces a clause that explains
how they destroyed the beast’s body.
In some translations it may be more
natural to combine the two clauses
and not translate the connector
(CEV95, NLT96). See the Comment
below.
and its body destroyed by fire.
(CEVUS06)
(2) It introduces the next event. They
burned it with fire (KJV, RSV52,
NRSV89, GW, REB89, NIV84).
-OR-
thrown (NIV84, NIV11, NET08,
TEV, NCV)
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
to be burned with fire: This phrase is
literally, “to the burning of fire.” There
are at least two ways to interpret this
clause:
(1) It means, they put the beast into the
fire in order to burn it.
into fire for burning 344
and threw his carcass into the fire
-OR-
in the fire to be burned 345
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
given over to be burned with fire: This is
a passive clause in English. 340 In some
languages it may be more natural to
translate this as an active clause with an
indefinite third person agent.
53
(2) It means,
example:
“burning
into a raging fire (GW)
into the flames (TEV)
-OR-
into the burning fire (NCV)
-OR-
into the
NIV11)
As mentioned above, the series of
passive verbs imply divine action based
on the verdict that was given by the
heavenly court: was killed…was
destroyed…was given.” 342
In some
languages one may be able translate:
and the Ancient of Day ordered his
body to be burned by fire
This event occurred prior to the event in
the previous clause. In some languages it
may be necessary to reorder the clauses.
See the comment on 7:11c.
given: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates given is an idiom. 343 In
some languages people may only give
something to people. If that is true in
your language, you may have to use a
different verb. For example:
For
-OR-
They/one (indefinite) put it into a
raging fire
They/one (indefinite) threw it into
blazing fire 341
fire.”
-OR-
blazing
fire
(NIV84,
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
fire: This is a different word for
fire than the one used 7:9-10. It was
probably not fire from the throne that
burned the body of the fourth beast.
Comment on 7:11c: In some languages it
may be more natural to change the order of
the two clauses (TEV). For example:
They/one (indefinite) threw its body
into the flames in order to destroy it
7:12
Commentaries and translations disagree
whether the events in this verse happened
before or after fourth beast died. Both
interpretations are possible. The Notes
follows the first view. 346 One way to show
this is to put the verse in parenthesis
(NIV84, NCV).
put (GW)
-OR-
placed
7:12a
As for the rest of the beasts: Daniel
wanted to explain more about what
Consultant Notes on Daniel
happened to the first three beasts.
English versions do this in two ways:
•
Translate this phrase as introducing a
new topic
As for the other three beasts
-ORI will now explain what happened
to the other three beasts
-ORThis is what happened to the
other three beasts
•
Translate the other beasts as the
object of the next clause.
They/one (indefinite) ousted the
other three beasts from power.
•
Translate the rest of the beasts as the
subject of a passive clause (TEV,
CEV95, REB89, GW, CEV95, NCV,
NJPS85, NIV84, NIV11, NLT07,
NJB).
The other beasts had their power
taken away…(TEV)
Option one is usually best. Your
language may have a different way to
introduce characters into the story.
Translate in a way that is most natural in
your language.
As for: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates as for is . In this
context, the connector introduces the
topic of the sentence.
the rest of the beasts: This phrase
refers to the first three beasts which
Daniel described in 7:4-6. Other ways
English versions translate this are:
54
best to not make this explicit. There are
two basic ways modern versions interpret
this event.
(1) The event occurred prior to the
death of the fourth beast (NIV84,
NCV, Steinmann). 347
Already a long time they/one
(indefinite) had removed them from
power
-OR-
They/one (indefinite) had already
ousted them from power
-OR-
They/one (indefinite) had already
put an end to their sovereignty 348
-OR-
The Ancient of Days had already
taken away their power to rule.
(2) This event is the next event in the
narrative. 349
They/one (indefinite) removed them
from power
-OR-
They/one (indefinite) ousted them
from power
-OR-
They/one (indefinite) put an end to
their sovereignty 350
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Interpretation (2) is also possible.
took away: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates take away can have a
more abstract meaning. 351
In this
context, it means to put an end to their
authority to rule. Other ways to say this
in English are:
deprived (REB89, NJB)
-OR-
the other three beasts (NLT96,
NLT07)
divested
-OR-
Ousted
the other beasts (TEV)
-OR-
the other animals (NCV)
their dominion was taken away: The
RSV52 translates this as a passive clause.
However, the Aramaic clause is literally,
“They (indefinite) took away their
dominion.” The implied agent of the
action is God. However, it is usually
-OR-
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
dominion: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates dominion can have
different meanings.
(1) It means, “authority to rule, power.”
(2) It means, “to rule.”
Consultant Notes on Daniel
(3) It refers to the people who live in an
area the king rules.
(4) It refers to the territory that a ruler
rules over.
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
There are different ways to translate this
in English. For example:
authority (NLT96, CEV95, NIV84)
-OR-
power (GW, TEV)
-OR-
sovereignty (REB89)
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
7:12b
but: The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates but is . In this context it
introduces a contrast. Although the first
three beasts no longer ruled, God allowed
them to live for a while longer. English
versions translate this connector in at
least two ways:
but (RSV52, NRSV89, NLT96,
NLT07, GW, TEV, CEV95, NCV,
NJPS85, NIV84, NIV11, NJB)
55
-OR-
The Ancient of Days had permitted
them to live
(2) This was an event that occurred
after the death of the fourth beast
(GW, NLT96). 353
they were allowed to live for a while
longer (NLT96, NLT07)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Interpretation (2) is possible.
prolonged: See the Notes at 4:27d. The
Aramaic word that the RSV52 translates
prolonged refers to a length of time. 354
The three beasts continued to live even
after they no longer ruled over their
kingdoms. 355 English versions translate
this in different ways:
allowed to live (NLT96, NLT07,
GW, NIV84, CEV95)
-OR-
permitted to live (NCV, similarly
TEV)
Translate this in a way that is most
natural in your language.
Translate this connector in a way that is
natural in your language.
The vision explains that the first three
beasts/kingdoms were allowed to exist
for a period of time, even though they
had already been conquered by the fourth
kingdom. They no longer had power to
rule. 356
their lives were prolonged: This is a
passive clause. In some languages it may
be more natural to translate this as an
active clause.352 God is the implied
agent of the action, although it is usually
best to not make this explicit. There are
two ways to interpret this phrase:
for a season and a time: This phrase is
literally, “until a time and a time.” 357
These two words occur together in 2:21a
and 7:25. In this context they function
together to give a common meaning This
phrase describes how long they
continued to live. For example:
-OR-
though (REB89, NET08)
(1) This was an event that occurred in
the past, prior to the death of the
fourth beast (NIV84, NIV11, NCV,
GeCL97).
They/one (indefinite) had allowed
them to live
-OR-
They/one (indefinite) had permitted
them to live
a while longer (NLT96, NLT07,
similarly CEV95)
-OR-
for a period of time (GW, NIV84,
NIV11)
-OR-
for a limited time (TEV)
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
season: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates season refers to a fixed
time. 358
an appointed time (REB89)
-OR-
a determined time 359
time: The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates time is a close synonym with
the previous word. It refers to a period
of time.
Paragraph 7:13-14
In 7:13 there is a change of scene. Daniel
continues to describe what was happening in
heaven. 360 However now a new person
comes on the clouds of heaven. This new
person is described as “one like a son of
man.” As he approaches the Ancient of
Days, he is given an eternal kingdom as well
as honor and praise. These two verses
present the climax of the first section of the
chapter..
A number of English versions begin a new
paragraph at this verse (NIV84, NIV11,
GW, NLT96, NLT07, TEV, NCV). Some
versions indent these verses to show that
they are in poetic form like the verses in 7:910 (NJB, ESVUS16). 361
Some versions include a heading before
verse 13.
The Son of Man is Given Dominion
(ESVUS16)
56
-OR-
I kept looking (Steinmann)
(2) It is a completed action
I saw (TEV, NCV, GW)
-OR-
I looked (NIV84)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Translate this action in a way that is
natural in your language.
in the night visions: See the Notes at
7:7a. 363 The Aramaic phrase is literally,
“in visions of the night.” This phrase
describes when Daniel saw the visions.
There are different ways to translate this
in English. For example:
in my vision during the night (GW)
-OR-
the visions that appeared to me
during the night 364
-OR-
nocturnal visions 365
Translate in a way that is most natural in
your language.
night: The Aramaic word phrase that the
RSV52 translates night describes the
time when Daniel saw the dream. 366 See
also Notes at 7:2; 7:7a. English versions
translate this term differently.
(1) The phrase is not specific. It does
not say which night. Daniel may
have seen the same dream on
several different nights.
during the night (GW)
7:13a
-OR-
I saw: See the Notes at 7:2. The Aramaic
verb that the RSV52 translates saw is
literally, “I was seeing.” 362 It introduces a
new scene. English versions translate this
in different ways:
(1) It expresses a continuous action.
As I continued to watch (CEV95)
-OR-
as I looked on (NJPS85)
-OR-
As my vision continued (NLT96)
-OR-
I was still watching (REB89)
in the night (TEV)
-OR-
at night (NCV, NIV84)
(2) The phrase refers to a specific night.
that night (NLT96, CEV95)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. In
some languages this information may be
redundant and unnatural. If that is true in
your language, you may not need to
translate this phrase.
visions: See the Notes at 7:1b; 7;7a. 367
The word is plural. English versions
translate this word in two ways.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
•
As a plural - “visions” (KJV, RSV52,
NRSV89, ESVUS16, GW, REB89,
NJB)
•
As a singular - “vision” (NLT96,
NLT07, REB89, CEV95, NCV,
NJPS85, NIV84, NIV11).
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language. Daniel probably saw
the same vision on different nights.
7:13b
and behold: See the Notes at 7:2, 5, 7a. The
Aramaic word that the RSV52 translates
behold often introduces something that
is unexpected or surprising. It can also
introduce a vision or a new part of a
vision. 368
(1) If your language has a special way
to introduce a vision or dream, you
may use it here. For example, some
English versions have:
and behold… (RSV52, KJV,
ESVUS16, Steinmann, Collins)
-OR-
there before me … (NIV84, NIV11,
Goldingay)
-OR-
and suddenly there was….
(2) Some versions introduce the dream
with a verb that means, “to see.”
I saw (NRSV89, NJB, REB89,
CEV95, NCV)
(3) Some versions do not use a special
word or phrase to introduce the
dream (GW, NLT96, NLT07, TEV,
NCV, NJPS85, Lucas).
Introduce the dream in a way that is
natural in your language.
57
-OR-
I saw someone coming in the sky
among the clouds. He looked like a
man.
Translate this clause in a way that is
natural in your language.
with the clouds of heaven: This phrase
describes where Daniel first saw the one
like the son of man. 369 This phrase is an
ancient image that writers used to
describe God. 370 English versions
interpret the preposition in different
ways. 371
(1) The person came with the clouds. 372
among
the
Goldingay) 373
clouds
(GW,
-OR-
surrounded by clouds (TEV)
-OR-
with the clouds (NET08, KJV,
NRSV89,
ESVUS16,
NLT96,
NLT07, NIV84, NIV11, NET08,
REB89, CEV95, NJPS85, Lucas,
Steinmann) 374
(2) The person came on the clouds. 375
on the clouds (NCV, NJB, NAB) 376
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language. Peter Gentry
notes that the phrase “coming on clouds”
implies an appearance or theophany of
Yahweh himself. 377 The one like a son of
man is identified with God in some way.
heaven: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates heaven has two
different meanings:
(1) It refers to the sky.
sky (NET08, NCV)
(2) It refers to the place where God is.
7:13b
with the clouds of heaven there came one
like a son of man: In some languages it
will be more natural to change the order
of the words in this clause. For example:
Someone was coming with the
clouds. He was like a human being.
heaven (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
REB89, CEV95, NJPS85, NIV84,
NIV11, NJB)
Both interpretations are acceptable. The
TEV and some other modern versions do
not translate “sky” since this idea is
implied by the word “clouds.” 378 You
Consultant Notes on Daniel
58
may do the same if it is not natural to
repeat this idea.
translate this phrase in a general
way:
there came: The Aramaic phrase that
the RSV52 translates came is literally
“he was coming.” It describes a
continuous action. 379
one like a son of man (RSV52,
NIV84, NIV11, NET08)
was coming (NET)
-OR-
was approaching (NET08)
-OR-
coming (NRSV89, NLT96, REB89,
CEV95, NCV, NIV84, NIV11, NJB,
Steinmann, Goldingay)
-OR-
was arriving
380
Scholars differ as to whether the one like
a son of man was coming from earth to
heaven or coming from heaven to
earth. 381 It is probably best not to be
explicit. The TEV has, “he was
approaching me.” This assumes that
Daniel saw himself in the vision next to
the thrones. It is probably best not to
include the personal pronoun me.
one like a son of man: The Aramaic
preposition that the RSV52 translates like
is - . In this context it introduces a
point of comparison.
In the vision,
Daniel saw someone coming who was
like a human. 382 There is a certain
ambiguity with this phrase, since only
the context indicates the degree of
comparability. As a result, scholars have
interpreted this phrase in different
ways. 383
(1) The one like a son of man was like a
human being in some way. The
context indicates that he is not like
the beasts previously described. 384
The context also indicates that the
one like a son of man is able to
represent the saints of the Most
High. 385 In order to represent God’s
people, implies that he is a member
of that group or class of humans.
However, the context also implies
that he may be more than a human,
since he comes on the clouds.
Given this ambiguity, it is best to
-OR-
Someone like a son of man (NLT07)
-OR-
one like a human being (NRSV89,
ESV89)
See the General Comment on the
phrase one like a son of man at the
end of this verse.
(2) Some scholars think that this
expression is a collective term that
refers to a God’s people in general
[the saints of the Most High (7:18,
21, 22, 25) or “the people of the
holy ones” (7:27)].
(3) Some think it is a collective term
that refers in particular to the Jewish
people. 386
(4) Some think it refers to a
supernatural being or an angel. 387
Interpretation (1) is recommended. 388
The following are some others ways you
may be able to translate this key term:
someone who looked like a man
(NLT96)
-OR-
someone who was like a human
being (REB89)
The UBS Translator’s Handbook
suggests that the phrase refers to
someone who resembles a human being
but in fact is not mortal. However, the
Notes here suggests that you do nt follow
that advice. For example, the TEV and
the CEV95 translate: “what looked like a
human being.” This is not recommended.
The focus should be on what the son of
man was like (a human being), and not
on what he was not like.
Traditionally, the church has interpreted
this person as the Messiah. 389 In the
New Testament, Jesus claimed to be the
Son of Man who would come with the
clouds of heaven. 390
Consultant Notes on Daniel
a son of man: The Aramaic phrase that
the RSV translates son of man is
. This phrase occurs only here in
the OT. The Hebrew equivalent phrase
is . 391
The singular phrase “son of man” (
) occurs 107 times in the Old
Testament. 93 of the 107 occurrences of
the phrase are in the book of Ezekiel,
where God uses the term to address
Ezekiel as a prophet and representative
of his people. 392 In Daniel 8:17 Gabriel
addressed Daniel by the same phrase. 393
Elsewhere occurs at Numbers
23:19, Isaiah 51:12; 56:2; Jeremiah
49:18, 33; 50:40; 51:43; Psalms 8:5;
80:18; 146:3; Job 16:21; 25:6; 35:8. The
singular form never takes the definite
article. occurs in poetic
parallelism with in Psalms 8:4.
(“son of humankind”) is in
parallelism with in Psalms 144:3.
The plural form en (“sons of
human beings”/ “humans”) occurs in
Deuteronomy 32:8; 2 Samuel 7:14;
Isaiah 52:14; Jeremiah 32:19; Ezekiel
31:14; Joel 1:12; Micah 6:6; Psalms
11:4; 12:2,9; 14:2; 21:11; 31:20; 36:8;
45:3; 49:3; 53:3; 57:5; 58:2; 62:10; 66:5;
89:48; 90:3; 107:8, 15, 21 31; 115:16;
Proverbs 8:4, 31; 15:11; Daniel 10:16.
The plural form with the article en
(“sons of the human beings”)
occurs in Genesis 11:5; 1 Samuel 26:19;
1 Kings 8:39; Psalms 33:13; 145:12;
Ecclesiastes 1:13,; 2;3,8; 3:10, 18, 19,
21; 8:11; 9:3, 12; and 2 Chronicles 6:30.
The phrase occurs in the plural form
with the article as en in Daniel
2:38 “human beings” (NRSV89) and in
5:21 as “men” (RSV), “people” (NIV84)
or “human society” (GNTD).
The phrase en “son of man” occurs
in Leviticus 24:10; 1 Samuel 9:1; 17:12;
2 Samuel 1:13; 17:25; 23:20; 1
Chronicles 11:22.
59
The phrase en (“sons of a man”)
occurs in Genesis 42:11, 13; Psalms 4:3;
49:3; 62:10; Lamentations 3:33.
The term son in Aramaic and Hebrew
can indicate a member of a class. 394 In
other words, son of man refer to a
member of the class “human.” It is
another way to refer to a human being. It
is often used in a collective way,
referring to humankind in general.
Hebrew parallelism often indicates this
meaning. For example:
No man shall dwell there,
no son of man shall sojourn in her
(Jeremiah 49:18, 33; 50:40; 51:43)
The phrase can be used to refer to
humans in their role in creation:
What is man that you are mindful of
him, And the son of man that you
care for him? (Psalms 8:4)
Some occurrences contrast humanity’s
sinfulness and God’s greatness. 395 For
example:
“God is not a man, that he should
lie, or a son of man that he should
repent.” (Numbers 23:19)
The phrase can emphasize the frailty,
weakness and mortality of humanity.”
“who are you that you are afraid of
man who dies, of the son of man
who is made like grass…” (Isaiah
51:12)
As mentioned above, 93 of the 107
occurrences of the phrase son of man are
found in the book of Ezekiel, where God
uses the term to address Ezekiel as a
prophet and representative of his people.
In this context, the focus is on a
particular
individual
rather
than
humanity as a whole. For example:
The word of the LORD came to me:
“Son of man, set your face against
Mount Seir, and prophesy against
it,” (Ezekiel 36:1 -ESV)
In Daniel 8:17 Gabriel also addresses
Daniel as . In these contexts
Consultant Notes on Daniel
60
there may be a nuance of dignity, since
God is addressing those who represent
him as his prophets.
a son of man (RSV52, CEV95,
NIV84, NIV11, NLT07, NET08,
NJB)
In one unique context, the phrase seems
to refer to a Davidic king. In this case the
“son of man” is understood in the sense
of a royal figure who will rescue or
restore his people (Psalms 80:18-19). 396
The LORD will strengthen him for his
mission.
However, this may be confusing in
many languages.
But let your hand be on the man of
your right hand, the son of man
whom you have made strong for
yourself! (Psalms 80:17- ESV)
Psalm 80 presents this son of man as
having unique messianic features. 397
The imagery of Psalms 80:17 also
invites comparison with Daniel 7.
Israel is described as a garden
(vineyard) and her enemies are wild
animals. The king will restore the
garden and defeat the beasts (who are
symbolic of foreign nations). Psalms
80 is about the king but he is also
called “son of man.” This Psalm may
have influenced Daniel 7 and the New
Testament use of the term “son of
man.”
English versions translate the phrase
son of man in different ways.
(a) You may translate it as a synonym
for humans, in particular within their
role in creation. For example:
a human being (NRSV89, REB89,
TEV, NCV, NJPS85)
-OR-
a man (NLT96) 398
(b) Some translate it as a title.
However, the word son may be
confusing in that it could refer
particularly to a male offspring.
Option (a) is recommended. This verse
is alluded to twice in the New Testament
(Revelation 1:13; 14:14) where the
adverb “like” introduces the phrase.
The context of Daniel 7 suggests a
parody on Genesis 1. Psalms 80 also
makes a similar connection between a
coming king, beasts and a garden. This
son of man is unique among all
humanity. He is the promised son-king,
who will fulfill the role for which
humans were originally created. As such
he is the true son of man. He is second
Adam, who will rule over a restored
Garden.
7:13c
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context, it introduces the next event in
the narrative. Daniel saw the one like a
son of man approach the Ancient of
Days.
he came to the Ancient of Days: This
clause describes where the one like a son
of man was going.
he approached the Ancient One
-OR-
he came near the Ancient One, who
had lived forever.
he came: The Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates came is literally, “to
reach, attain to, come upon.” 399 In this
context it means, “come to.” Other ways
to say this in English are:
-OR-
he approached (NET, NLT96,
NLT07, NET08, REB89, NIV84,
NIV11, Collins)
the Son of Man (GW)
-OR-
the Son of man (KJV)
(c) Some versions translate it literally:
he went to (TEV, Goldingay)
-OR-
came near (NCV)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
the Ancient of Days: See the Notes at
7:9c and the General Comment on this
term. 400 In this context, the phrase has a
definite article. English versions translate
this phrase in different ways.
61
RSV52 translates was presented is
literally “they (indefinite) brought him
near.” 403 In some languages it may be
more natural to translate this as an active
verb. For example:
They/one (indefinite) escorted him
404
-OR-
(a) Translate it as a descriptive phrase.
the one who had been living forever
(TEV)
(b) Translate it as a title. 401
the Ancient One (NRSV89, GW,
NLT96, Lucas)
-OR-
the Ancient One, who has lived for
endless years (GW)
Some versions translate it literally:
the Ancient of Days (KJV, NIV84,
RSV52,
NET08,
NJPS85,
Steinmann)
(c) Translate the person to whom the
title refers.
the Eternal God (CEV95)
-OR-
God, who has been alive forever
(NCV)
Options (1) and (2) is recommended.
Translate this phrase in a way that is
most natural in your language. The
phrase refers to Yahweh, the covenant
God of Israel. However, it is usually best
not to make this explicit as the CEV95
and the NCV do. You may want to put
this information in a footnote.
Comment on 7:13b-c: In some languages it
may be more natural to combine the two
verbs came (7:13b) and came (7:13c). For
example:
I saw someone like a human being.
He came with the clouds to the
Ancient One. 402
7:13d
and was presented: The RSV52 translates
this clause with a passive verb.
However, the Aramaic verb that the
They/one brought him near (KJV)
-OR-
They/one (indefinite) presented him
-OR-
They/one (indefinite) led him
Translate this action in a way that is most
natural in your language.
before him: The Aramaic phrase that the
RSV52 translates before him implies that
the one who was like a son of man was
about to meet someone very important.
English versions translate this in different
ways.
(a) Translate in a way that emphasizes
the important status of the one
called the Ancient of Days.
before the throne of the Ancient
One. 405
-OR-
into his presence (NLT96,NLT07,
NIV84, NIV11, NJB)
(b) Translate a connector that simply
means, “to.”
to him
NJPS85)
(GW,
REB89,
TEV,
(c) Translate literally
before him (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89)
Option (a) is recommended. Translate the
meaning in a way that is natural in your
language. The phrase refers to God
himself, but it usually better not to make
this explicit (as the CEV95 and NCV
do).
General Comments on one like the son of
man:
Stephen Wellum explains that “in the Old
Testament, the phrase ‘son of man’ is used
as a synonym for humans within the context
of their role in creation.” 406 However, “as
Consultant Notes on Daniel
the biblical metanarrative unfolds through
God’s covenants with man, the phrase ‘son
of man’ refers more specifically to one who
is unique among humanity. In Daniel 7, the
title takes on the significance of a
superhuman figure who functions alongside
the ‘Ancient of Days,’ who is God seated for
judgment. 407
The key issue is the meaning and identity of
the phrase “(one) like a son of man” in
Daniel 7:13. The Aramaic phrase is כְּ ַב֥ר אֱנָ ֖שׁ
“like a son of a man.” The context implies
that this person is like a human being yet
different in some way. He comes with the
clouds of heaven and is then ushered into the
heavenly court and into the presence of the
Ancient of Days. The picture is one of
enthronement. This one like a son of man is
given authority, honor and sovereignty to
rule over all nations. Thomas Schreiner
explains, “Indeed, the son of man in Daniel
does not grasp rule through military
conquest by which he brutally rules over
other human beings. He is given the
kingdom of God himself, and thereby he
fulfills the role for which human beings
were created (Psalm 8).” 408 The reader is
motivated to ask who exactly is this person?
407F
A similar term is found later in Daniel 10:16
(“ כִּ דְ מוּת֙ בְּ נֵ ֣י אָ ֔ ָדםone) like the form of sons of
man” where it describes a person who
appears to Daniel.
This same person is
described as “ כְּ מַ ְר ֵ ֥אה אָ ָ ֖דםlike the appearance
of a man” in 10:18. Even Daniel is called
“ בֶּ ן־אָ ֔ ָדםson of man” in Daniel 8:17. Yet
there is a difference in the contexts of the
Hebrew terms used here and the Aramaic
phrase at 7:13. Steinmann notes that these
Hebrew phrases are often found in contexts
of “sinfulness, mortality and frailty” of
human beings. 409 This is different from the
context of one like a son of man in Daniel
7:13-14 where the one like the son of man is
brought before God in the heavenly court.
408F
Scholars interpret the identity of the one like
a son of man in Daniel 7:13-14 in different
ways. The following is a summary of the
main views:
62
1. The Individual Interpretation: Some
authors argue that the one like a son of man
refers to a human deliverer, such as Judas
Maccabeus, a Jewish priest who led the
Maccabean Revolt against the Seleucid
Empire in the 2d century BC. 410
2. The Collective Interpretation:
Some
scholars suggest that the one like a son of
man is a collective term or symbol for God’s
people. Support for this view is based on
the interpretation of the vision given in
Daniel 7:15-28. It is argued that just as the
one like a son of man, the individual, is
given an eternal kingdom in 7:14, so the
“saints of the Most High” are given the
kingdom in Daniel 7:18, 22, 27. As a result,
these scholars argue that the two should be
equated; that is, both refer to the people of
Israel. However, a close reading of the
interpretation of the vision shows that this
argument is weak. The one like a son of
man and the “Saints of the Most High”
(7:18, 22, 25, 27) do not exactly correspond.
Peter Gentry explains this well. It was a
common phenomenon in the ancient Near
East for a king to both represent and stand
for the people as a whole. This is true in
Daniel 7. The one like a son of man “is an
individual associated with the saints of the
Most High” but the relationship is that of a
king and his kingdom.” 411 The one like a
son of man and the saints of the Most High
are “closely identified but this does not
exclude the individuality of the son of
man.” 412 There is a close relation between
the two. Gentry also notes that that son of
man’s “destiny is linked to the suffering
people of God and vice versa.” 413 As a
result, one can say that the one like a son of
man and the saints are closely identified due
to the close connection between king and
people. 414
The collective interpretation is extremely
rare in early historical exegesis.” 415 It first
occurs in Christian tradition in the
commentary of Ephrem Syrus of the fourth
century. 416 Syrus considered the reference
to “the son of man” as a reference to the
Jewish people. 417 It was only later at the
end of the nineteenth century that the
Consultant Notes on Daniel
collective view became the standard way of
interpreting the phrase one like a son of
man.
Modern commentators who hold this view
include J. Mongomery, N. Porteous,
Hartman and Di Lella, A. Lacocque, S.
Driver,
E. Eaton, as well as some
evangelical commentators such as J.
Sailhamer and N.T. Wright.
3. The Angelic Interpretation:
Those who hold this view assert that the one
like a son of man is a supernatural angelic
figure. For example, J. Collins takes the
view that the son of man “represents the
archangel Michael, and that the ‘holy ones’
(“saints”; cf. vv. 18, 27) of Daniel 7 are his
angelic followers on whose behalf he
receives the kingdom.” 418 Others think the
one like a son of man was the angel Gabriel
or an unnamed angel.
Support for this view is based in part on the
interpretation that the saints of the Most
High are angels. See the comment on the
phrase “the saints of the Most High” at the
end of 7:18b.
Scholars who follow this view include J.
Collins, L. Dequeker,
and Z. Zevit.
Goldingay tends to favor this view, although
he admits it is hard to have complete
certainty. 419 Lucas thinks that it may be
“misguided to make a sharp distinction
between ‘angelic’ and ‘human’ in the
reference of the imagery. 420
4. The Symbolic Interpretation
Ernest Lucas argues for a symbolic
interpretation of the phrase one like a son of
man. 421 In some ways this is not too
different from the collective interpretation.
Lucas observes that the figures of the beasts
contrast with the figure of one like a son of
man. God took away the kingdoms of the
beasts, however, he gave an eternal kingdom
to the one like a son of man. The beasts
symbolize human powers. The one like a
63
human symbolized the power of the
kingdom of God.
Lucas explains that
humans are created in the image of God to
rule over the animals. As a result, God’s
rule is being established, even though it is
exercised through humans. 422 In summary,
just as the beasts represented earthly
kingdoms, the one like a human being is a
symbolic figure representing “(the people)
of the holy ones of the Most High.” 423
5. The Messianic Interpretation:
The word “Messiah” was first used in the
OT to refer to someone who was anointed
by Yahweh to fulfill a certain role, such as a
prophet, priest or king. Later the title came
to apply more generally to a Davidic king, to
a hoped for redeemer who would deliver his
people. The people of Israel people looked
forward to a royal figure who would fulfill
the promises that God gave to king David.
This hope became especially important
during the period of the exile.
The Messianic interpretation of the oldest
view of the phrase one like a son of man. 424
It interprets the phrase one like a son of
man as the Messiah, the one who would
come to reign as Davidic King and who
would be enthroned beside the Ancient of
Days. 425
Jesus used the phrase son of man to refer to
himself more than any other phrase or title.
However, it should be noted that the
background and significance of the phrase
has been intensely debated by scholars. The
NT use of this phrase and the linguistic
issues complex. It is clear, however, that
Jesus used the title the Son of Man coming
with the clouds to refer to himself. 426 He
cites Psalm 110 together with Daniel 7 in
Matthew 26:64 and Mark 14:62 to refer to
his enthronement as Messiah.
The approach followed here in these notes
is that presented by S. Dempster, P. Gentry,
S. Wellum and T. Schreiner.
Stephen
Wellum explains: “in order to grasp what
Jesus meant by calling himself the Son of
Man, it is crucial to understand it within the
Consultant Notes on Daniel
storyline of Scripture and its Old Testament
background. 427 In the OT the “son of man”
was used as a synonym for humans within
the context of their role in creation. 428 The
vision of the four beasts in Daniel 7:1-8 is a
parody of Genesis 1. Stephen Dempster
explains that “the contrast between the
beasts and the one like a son of man is a
contrast between a parody of the divine
image and divine image itself, humanity as it
was intended to be.” 429
Psalm 8 gives a commentary on Genesis 1
using the expression “son of man” to
describe “the exalted position of weak and
insignificant humanity as God’s vicegerent
of creation.” 430
In Psalms 2:12 the son of man is not only
called the Messiah and son of God, but also
bar, the Aramaic term for ‘son’ used in
Daniel. The son in Psalms 2 is destined to
rule the world. He will restore the original
glory that Adam had. 431
The terms “man” and “son of man” occur
together in Psalms 80:17. On the one hand,
the two could refer to Israel as a collective
whole (Exodus 4:22). 432 However, Wellum
suggests that in the context of the entire
Psalter, the phrase son of man refers to the
anointed king who represents Israel as a
whole. 433 Following this view, the phrase
‘son of man’ should be understood in terms
of a typological pattern, from Adam to Israel
to David. In this interpretation, the phrase
son of man carries messianic overtones and
refers to a unique representative human. 434
Wellum concludes that “as the biblical
metanarrative unfolds through God’s
covenants with man, ‘son of man’ refers
more specifically to one is unique among
humanity.” 435
He “brings covenantal
reconciliation between God and man,
restoring man’s righteous vice regent rule
over God’s creation.” 436 Tom Schreiner
explains, “Indeed, the son of man in Daniel
does not grasp rule through military
conquest…He is given the kingdom of God
himself, and thereby he fulfills the role for
which human beings were created
(Psalm8).” 437
64
James Hamilton suggests that the Davidic
features of the text are also associated with
the ‘everlasting dominion’ given to the
Davidic king in 2 Samuel 7:13. There is
also an association with Psalm 8, where the
Davidic son of man enjoys dominion
(Genesis 1:28) over the beasts. 438
Hamilton asserts that “It cannot be the case
that God has abandoned the promised
program of a king from a line of David, for
if God is to be faithful to the promises he
made to David in 2 Samuel 7, the
conquering king must be a human
descendant of David.” 439 The placement of
thrones in Daniel 7:9 implies that the one
like a son of man will be enthroned next to
Yahweh.
Hamilton suggests that this
concept fits well with Psalm 110:1 but with
the way that Psalm 45:6 addresses the
Davidic king. 440
The phrase one like a son of man connects
him with the earth. However, the fact that
he comes on clouds also links him to
heaven. 441 Moreover, the coming on clouds
suggests an appearance or theophany of
Yahweh himself. Gentry explains that if
Daniel 7:13 does not refer to an appearance
of deity, it is the only exception in about
seventy instances in the Old Testament. 442
Gentry concludes that ‘coming on the clouds
of heaven’ is a clear indication of deity,
while the name “son of man” is a clear
indication of humanity.” 443 Later we learn
that all peoples, nations and languages will
worship him (7:14).
Jesus’ self-designation as Son of Man
derives from the entire storyline of
Scripture, the OT background, as well as
from Daniel 7:13-14. The title indicates
how Jesus understood his role as Messiah
for the people of Israel. The New Testament
interprets Jesus’ resurrection and ascension
into heaven as a fulfillment of the events
described in 7:13-14.
Early texts of the first century AD show that
the title Son of Man was also associated
with the Messiah. 444 This was the majority
Consultant Notes on Daniel
view of the Rabbis into the Middle Ages. 445
The Messianic interpretation is also the
interpretation traditionally favored by
Christians. 446 It was also widely held among
scholars in general until the end of the
nineteenth century.
Among those who have held the Messianic
view include rabbinic exegesis, the Talmud,
Jerome, Keil, E. J. Young, J. Baldwin, I
Duguid, A. Steinmann, Peter Gentry, P.
House, James Hamilton.
David Wells explains that “Jesus employed
a term which has specific content in the Old
Testament, but in applying it to himself and
his work it came to have a meaning both
larger and more complex than it does in the
Old Testament.” 447
7:14a
And: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context, it introduces the next event that
Daniel saw in the dream.
English
versions translate this connector in
different ways:
65
The Ancient of Days gave him the
authority to rule. He ruled over
many people and they praised him.
to him: The text gives emphasis to the
pronoun him (“the one who was like a
son of man”). This phrase occurs first in
the Aramaic clause. In some languages it
may be necessary to change the word
order of the clause. If you translate that
way in your language, try to keep the
emphasis on “the one who was like a son
of man.”
was given: The Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates was given can have
different meanings depending on the
context. 448 Here it has the sense “to
transfer, delegate.” The Ancient of Days
delegated authority to “the one who was
like a son of man.” Use a verb that is
natural in your language for each of the
objects that follow.
and (KJV, RSV52, NJPS85)
dominion: See the Notes at 4:3d; 7:6c.
The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates dominion is an abstract word.
It can have different meanings depending
on the context. English versions translate
it differently:
-OR-
(1) It means, “power, authority to rule.”
no connector (NRSV89, GW,
NLT96, NLT07, REB89, TEV,
CEV95, NCV, NIV84, NET08,
NIV11, NJB)
Translate this connection in a way that is
natural in your language.
to him was given dominion and glory and
kingdom: This is a passive clause. In
some languages it may be more natural to
translate this as an active verb. The
Ancient of Days is the implied subject.
For example:
The Ancient of Days gave him
In some languages, you may need a
different verb for each object. Use a verb
(or verbs) that is natural in your language
for the different objects - dominion, glory
and kingdom. For example:
authority (NLT96, NLT07, TEV,
NCV, NIV84, NIV11)
-OR-
power (GW) 449
-OR-
sovereignty (REB89)
(2) It means, “to rule.” 450
rule (NJB)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
glory: See the Notes at 2:37b; 4:30b,
5:18b, 20e. The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates glory means, “dignity,
honor.” 451 English versions translate it in
different ways:
glory (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
REB89, CEV95, NCV, NJPS85,
NIV84, NIV11, ESVUS16)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
7:14b
honor (GW, NLT96, NLT07, TEV,
NJB, NET08)
In some languages it may be more
natural to translate this idea with a verb.
For example:
honored him
-OR-
caused him to have
reputation among people
a
great
kingdom: See the Notes at 2:37b; 4:3b.
The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates kingdom can have a wide range
of meanings. There are at least three
different possible interpretations:
(1) It refers to the realm or people that
he ruled. This is the meaning in
Daniel 2:39-40 and many other
places in Daniel. 452 For example:
kingdom (KJV, RSV52)
-OR-
a kingdom
Steinmann)
66
(GW,
ESVUS16,
(2) It refers to the abstract idea of
kingship, or sovereignty. 453
kingship (NRSV89, NJPS85, NJB,
Lucas)
-OR-
royal power (NLT96, TEV)
-OR-
kingly power (REB89)
-OR-
power (CEV95)
-OR-
sovereign power (NIV84)
-OR-
sovereignty (NLT07, NET08) 454
(3) It refers to a king’s reign. 455
has made you emperor (TEV) 456
-OR-
royal power (GNTD)
-OR-
made you king
-OR-
caused you to rule
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
that: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . English
versions translate this connector in
different ways.
(1) It introduces the next thing in the
vision that Daniel saw (NJB,
NIV84, NIV11, NET08, Steinmann,
Collins). 457 These versions introduce
the clause without a connector. The
parallelism indicates the relationship
between the two ideas.
(2) It introduces the purpose why the
Ancient of Days gave him authority.
that (KJV,
ESVUS16)
RSV52,
NRSV89,
(3) Some use a connector that indicates
a result
so that (NLT96, NLT07, REB89,
TEV, CEV95, Lucas, Goldingay)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Translate this in a way that is most
natural in your language.
all peoples, nations, and languages should
serve him: There are different ways to
translate these three terms.
The people of every race and nation
and people who spoke every
language worshipped him.
-OR-
All people who live in every nation
and who speak every language
worshipped the one who was like a
human.
all peoples: See the Notes at 3:4b; 6:25a.
The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates peoples means, “nation,
people.” 458 The same word occurs in a
list in 3:4, 7, 29: 4:1; 5:19. Other ways
English versions translate this are:
people groups
-OR-
people of every race (NLT96,
NLT07, Lucas, similarly the TEV,
and Goldingay)
-OR-
people of every tribe (NCV)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
describes continuous action in the
past:
Translate this word in a way that is
natural in your language.
nations: See the Notes at 3:4b; 6:15a.
The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates nations also occurs in the lists
at 3:4, 7 ,31; 5:19. 459 A nation usually
refers to a group of people who are ruled
by one government and who speak a
common language. Translate this word in
a way that is natural in your language.
languages: See the Notes at 3:4b;
6:15a. 460 The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates languages is literally
“tongues.” 461 In this context, it is used in
a figurative way. It means, “language
group” or people who speak the same
language.
should serve: See the Notes at 3:12b;
6:16c, 20b. The Aramaic verb () that
the RSV52 translates serve is different
from the verb in 7:10c ( “to
minister”). It occurs only in Daniel 3:12,
14, 17, 18, 28; 6:17, 21 and 7:14, 27.
The verb is in the imperfect. English
versions interpret the verb in different
ways:
(1) It means, “to worship” (NIV84,
NIV11). Gentry notes that outside
of Daniel 7 it always refers to the
worship of divinity. 462
(2) It means, “to serve” (KJV, RSV52,
NRSV89, ESVUS16, NJPS85, GW,
NCV, REB89, TEV, CEV95) 463
(3) It means to “submit.” (GeCL97)
(4)
It means “to obey” (NLT96,
NLT07)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. Some
languages may have different words that
mean “to worship” God. Use a word that
most naturally expresses this idea.
English versions also differ in the way
they interpret the kind of action. 464 For
example:
(1) The clause describes the action that
was taking place in the vision. It
67
worshiped him (NIV84, NIV11)
-OR-
were worshipping him
(2) The clause interrupts the account of
what happened in the vision. The
verb expresses an assertion. James
Bejon suggests it is a peel of praise
put on the lips of the heaven’s hosts
as the Son of Man is crowned. 465 The
verb describes to a future event.
will worship him
(3) The verb describes a purpose:
would worship him
Lucas)
(Goldingay,
would obey him (NLT07)
would serve him (GNTD)
(4) The verb describes a necessary
action.
should serve him (KJV, RSV52,
NRSV89, ESVUS16, REB89)
The first option is recommended. Daniel
described a future event as if it was
happening right in front of him as he
watched. Translate this idea in a way
that is natural in your language.
7:14c
The Aramaic text does not use a connector
to introduce this verse part.
English
translate this in different ways:
(1) no connector (NIV84, NIV11, NJB,
NJPS85, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
NET08, TEV, CEV95, NCV)
(2) a colon (KJV)
(3) a semicolon (NRSV89, REB89)
In 7:14c the text tells something new about
the dominion. Translate the connection in a
way that is most natural in your language.
his dominion is an everlasting dominion:
See the Notes at 4:34e. The pronoun his
refers to the one like a son of Man. Modern
Consultant Notes on Daniel
versions translate this clause in different
ways:
(1) Daniel changes from simply
describing the kingdom in the
present to describing the magnitude
and extent of his rule in the future.
These clauses border on praise.
His rule is everlasting
-OR-
He will rule forever.
-OR-
His rule is eternal (NLT07)
-OR-
His rule will last forever
-OR-
The one who is like a son of man
will rule forever
dominion: See the Notes at 7:14a. The
Aramaic word that the RSV52 translates
dominion has a slightly different meaning
here than in 7:14a.
(1) It means, “to rule.”
His rule is eternal (NLT07, REB89,
similarly NCV, NJB)
(2) It means, “power, sovereignty.” 466
power (GW) 467
-OR-
sovereignty (NLT96, REB89) 468
-OR-
authority (TEV, NET08)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
everlasting: See the Notes at 4:34e. The
Aramaic word that the RSV52 translates
everlasting means, “for a long time in the
future, eternity.” 469
is eternal (NLT07, NET08)
-OR-
will last forever
-OR-
will not pass away (NIV84, NIV11)
which shall not pass away: The Aramaic
verb that the RSV52 translates pass away
means, “to go away, vanish.” Other
ways to say this are:
He will not stop ruling
-OR-
He will never cease to rule
68
This clause repeats the information in the
previous clause, but in a negative way. In
some languages it may be unnatural to
repeat this information in this way. If
that is true in your language, you may not
have to translate this clause (NCV). See
the second meaning line in the Display.
7:14d
This verse part is parallel to 7:14c.
It
repeats the information from 7:14c but from
a different perspective.
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context Daniel gave more information
about the one who was like a son of man.
This verse part explains more about his
dominion.
Most English versions
introduce this verse part with the
connector and. Some English versions
do not translate a connector (NLT07,
NET08, GW). Translate the connection
in a way that is natural in your language..
his kingdom one that shall not be
destroyed: See the Notes at 2:44b. The
pronoun his refers to the one who was
like a son of man. This clause says the
same thing as in 7:14c, but in a different
way. It is a passive clause. In some
languages it may be more natural to
translate this as an active clause. For
example:
No one will ever destroy his
kingdom.
-OR-
No one will conquer and destroy his
realm.
kingdom: See the Notes at 7:14a. The
word kingdom is a synonym of
“dominion.” However, the words can
express different meanings depending
upon the context.
(1) In this context, it refers to a “realm”
a territory or a people that the king
ruled. 470
(2) In this context, it refers to
sovereignty, power or authority to
rule.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
power 471
Section 7:15-27
-OR-
kingship (NRSV89, NJPS85)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
be destroyed: See the Notes at 2:44a;
6:26e. The Aramaic verb that the RSV52
translates be destroyed is a general word
that means, “to destroy, perish.”
(1) It has the general meaning, “to be
destroyed.” 472
be destroyed (CEV95, NCV, GW,
NLT96, NLT07, REB89, KJV,
RSV52,
NRSV89,
ESVUS16,
NIV84, NIV11)
(5) It has the specific meaning, “to
usurp, overthrow by force.”
be overthrown
-OR-
be conquered
(3) It means, “to cease.”
473
never end (TEV)
-OR-
come to an end (NJB)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. The
verb is usually translated as a passive in
English. In some languages it may be
more natural to translate it in an active
form with a third person indefinite
subject. For example:
No one will be able to destroy it
Chart on the Four Human Kingdoms versus the
Kingdom of God. The following chart has been
adapted from a chart created by Peter Gentry. 474
Human Kingdoms
Kingdom of God
Coming from the Coming with
the
Sea (chaotic, 7:2)
clouds (order, 7:13)
Not human
Arrogance
boastfulness
11, 20, 25)
69
one like a human
(7:13)
and Humility (7:13-14)
(7:8,
Temporal Kingdom Eternal
Kingdom
(7:11, 12, 26, 27)
(7:14, 27)
In this section, an angel interprets Daniel’s
vision. This section can be analyzed as an
alternating recursive sequence. First the
angel describes the four beasts, then he
describes those consecrated to the Most
High. This sequence repeats three times.
The final and climactic part occurs in 7:27b,
where all powers worship and obey the one
like a son of man.
7:15 Intro: Daniel is troubled; the angel
begins to interpret his vision
7:17
A: The four beasts are four kings
who had dominion over the world.
7:18 B: Those who are consecrated to the
Most High shall receive dominion over the
earth.
7:19 A. The little horn persecuted those
who were consecrated to the Most High.
7:22 B: Those who were consecrated to
the Most High will receive the kingdom.
7:23 A: The little horn shall persecute
those who were consecrated to the Most
High.
7:26-27a B. The kingdom shall be taken
away from the fourth beast and given to
those who are consecrated to the Most High.
7:27b C. The Most High shall have an
everlasting kingdom and all powers will
worship and obey him.
Notice that both sections in this chapter end
with a note of praise to the one like a son of
man.
Paragraph 7:15-16b
The vision ends at 7:14. In 7:15 the text
describes Daniel’s reaction to the vision. A
number of English versions begin a new
paragraph (NJPS85, GW, REB89) or a new
heading (NIV84, NJB, NRSV89, NLT96,
TEV, CEV95, NCV) at 7:15. 475 For
example:
Daniel’s
Vision
(ESVUS16, NRSV89)
Interpreted
Consultant Notes on Daniel
70
The Interpretation of the Dream
(NIV84, NIV11)
versions translate this phrase in two
ways:
An Angel Interprets Daniel’s Vision
(NET08)
(a) Some English versions omit this
phrase and refer to Daniel himself.
(GW, NLT96, NJB, TEV, CEV95,
GW, NCV ).
The Vision Is Explained (NLT07)
The Meaning of Daniel’s Vision
(CEVUS06)
These visions terrified me.
-OR-
The Meaning of the dream (NCV)
I, Daniel, was terrified by what I
saw
7:15a
-OR-
“As for me, Daniel: The Aramaic text that
the RSV52 translates As for me, Daniel is
literally “I, Daniel.” This clause
introduces a change in focus. The text
gives emphasis to the pronoun I. Daniel
began to describe how he personally felt
about what he saw in the vision. English
versions translate this in different ways:
As for me, Daniel
NRSV89,
ESVUS16,
NJPS85, Collins)
I was terrified (CEVUS06)
(b) Use a different metaphor to express
the same idea:
I was troubled inside myself (BDS)
-OR-
I was troubled in the deepest part of
myself (NBS)
-OR-
I was profoundly anxious in my
heart
(RSV52,
NET08,
-OR-
I Daniel (KJV, NCV, GW, NLT96,
NLT07, NIV84, NJB, Lucas,
Steinmann, Goldingay)
(c) Some English versions translate this
literally (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
REB89, NJPS85)
my spirit within me was anxious
(ESVUS16)
-OR-
I (TEV)
Translate this phase in a way that is most
natural in your language.
my spirit within me was anxious: The
phrase my spirit within me may be
confusing or unnatural in some
languages. If that is true in your
language, you may use the pronoun I or
the phrase I, Daniel as the subject of the
clause. For example:
I was anxious
-OR-
I, Daniel, was deeply troubled (GW)
-OR-
I, Daniel, was deeply disturbed
(NJB)
my spirit within me: The Aramaic word
that the RSV52 translates spirit can have
different meanings depending on the
context. Here it refers to what Daniel felt
in his innermost thoughts. English
Option (a) is recommended. If you have
an idiom in your language that has this
meaning you may be able to use it here.
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
within me: The Aramaic phrase
that the RSV52 translates within me is
literally, “in the midst of my sheath.” 476
A sheath is a leather case or covering
where a solder puts the blade of a sword.
In this context, the word “sheath” has a
figurative meaning. It means, “body.” 477
English versions differ in the way they
translate this: 478
•
Some versions omit this phrase,
because it is redundant (GW,
NLT96, NLT07, TEV, CEV95,
NIV84, NLT11, NCV, NJB) 479
•
Some English versions translate the
meaning directly:
Consultant Notes on Daniel
within me (RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, REB89, NJPS85)
•
Some versions use a physical term to
express how profound this vision
affected Daniel.
in the midst of [my] body (KJV)
-OR-
in my heart
-OR-
Translate the phrase in a way that is most
natural in your language.
anxious: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates anxious means, “to be
distressed.” 480 Other ways that English
versions translate this are:
(NRSV89,
REB89,
-OR-
deeply troubled (GW, Lucas)
-OR-OR-
disturbed (NJB, Goldingay)
-OR-
(NET08,
the visions of my head alarmed me: This
clause repeats the idea in 7:15a but with
greater force and emotion. In some
languages it may be more natural to
begin with the first person pronoun. For
example:
-OR-
I was terrified by what I had seen.
visions of my head: The same phrase
occurs at 2:28c; 4:5b, 13. The Aramaic
word that the RSV52 translates head can
have different meanings. Daniel did not
see the visions with his eyes. He saw
them in his mind. Other ways to say this
in English are:
vision of my mind (NJPS85)
-OR-
worried (NCV)
distressed
Collins)
Translate this connection in a way that is
natural in your language.
I was alarmed by the visions I saw
in my mind.
in the deepest part of me
troubled
NLT96)
71
Steinmann,
-OR-
terrified (CEVUS06)
Daniel had seen how wild and violent the
four beasts were. He also saw that God
planned to judge them. As a result, he
became worried and very much afraid.
visions that went through my mind
(NCV)
-OR-
Visions that passed through my
mind (NIV84, NIV11)
In some languages the phrase my head is
implied by the word visions and it is not
natural to repeat that meaning. If that is
true in your language you may omit the
phrase of my head. For example:
my visions (GW, NLT96)
-OR-
7:15b
visions I saw (TEV)
and:
The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is In this
context, it introduces a clause that is
parallel to 7:15a. It repeats the same
meaning as in 7:15a but with even more
emotion and force.
(1) Most English versions translate a
connector
and (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
REB89, TEV, NJPS85, NIV84,
NIV11, NET08, NJB)
(2) Some English versions begin a new
sentence (NCV)
It is important, however, that the reader
understands that Daniel saw these visions
in his mind and not with his eyes.
alarmed me: The Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates alarm means, “to
frighten someone, to terrify someone.” 481
This word is similar to the word
“anxious” in 7:15a but even more
forceful. It has an even stronger meaning
of fear. The following are some good
examples from English versions:
terrified me (NRSV89, NLT96)
-OR-
frightened me (GW, NCV)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
72
-OR-
-OR-
tormented me 482
who stood in attendance (Lucas,
Goldingay)
-OR-
alarmed me (Lucas, Goldingay)
Comment on 7:15a-b: In some languages it
may be more natural to change the order of
the clauses. For example:
In some languages it may be necessary to
be more specific. For example:
one of the angels who was
standing by the throne
The visions I saw alarmed me, and I
was deeply disturbed (TEV).
Another possibility is to combine the two
clauses:
I was worried and frightened by
what I saw 483
7:16a
The clause in 7:16 does not begin with a
connector. However, the text implies that
Daniel’s actions were a result of his
thoughts in 7:15. The NLT07 and the
CEVUS06 begins the clause with the
connector So to indicate the connection
more explicitly.
I approached one of those who stood
there: In this clause, Daniel described
the what he did next in the vision. He
approached someone who was standing
near the throne. 484 English versions
translate this clause in different ways:
I went to someone who
standing there (GW)
was
-OR-
I approached one of those standing
beside the throne (NLT96, NLT07)
-OR-
I approached one of the attendants
(NRSV89, NJPS85)
Translate this in a way that is natural in
your language.
those who stood there: The phrase
refers to one of the thousands who stood
before the Ancient of Days (7:10). These
were probably angels who stood before
God. 485 Other ways to say this in
English are:
those standing beside the throne
(NLT96)
-OR-
the attendants (NRSV89, NJPS85)
-OR-
One of the angels who stood by
the throne and served God
Translate the meaning in a way that is
most natural in your language.
7:16b
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context, it introduces the next event in
the vision. After Daniel approached, he
asked a question to one of those standing
there.
(1) the connector introduces the next
event
and (KJV, RSV52, ESVUS16, GW,
NLT96, NLT07, NCV, TEV,
NJPS85, NIV84, NIV11, NET08)
(2) the connector introduces a purpose
clause:
to (NRSV89)
Both options are acceptable.
asked him the truth concerning all this:
See the Notes at 2:45d. The Aramaic
word that the RSV52 translates truth
means, “what is certain, what is
reliable.” 486 English versions interpret
this clause in at least two different ways:
(1) Daniel asked about the meaning of
the vision. For example:
asked him to explain to me what all
of this means 487
-OR-
asked him to interpret what it meant
-OR-
and asked him what it all meant
(NLT96, NLT07, similar the NCV)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
previous paragraph (7:15-18). See
the TEV, GW, NLT96, NLT07.
REB89,
CEV95,
NRSV89,
ESVUS16).
and asked him the true meaning of
all this (NIV84, Lucas, similarly
Goldingay)
-OR-
and asked him to explain it all
(TEV)
(2) Daniel asked about the certainty of
all that he had seen in the vision.
He may have wanted to know the
certainty or inevitability of the
things that he had seen could be
avoided or changed. 488 See also the
use of this verb in 2:8; 6:12.
I began to seek [answers] from him
as to the certainty of all these
things 489
(2) Daniel asked him whether the vision
was true. For example:
and asked him to tell me the truth…
(GW)
-OR-
and asked him the truth of all this
(KJV, Steinmann)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Option (2) is also good. It is important
not to imply that Daniel thought that
parts of the vision were false.
concerning all this: This phrase refers
to what Daniel had seen in his vision. It
may be helpful to make this explicit. For
example:
what I had seen (BFrCL)
-OR-
the vision
Paragraph 7:16c-18
In 7:16c-18 one of the persons who was
standing near the throne answered Daniel.
English versions differ where they begin a
new paragraph.
(1) Some English versions begin a new
paragraph at 7:16c (NIV84, NIV11,
NCV).
(2) Some English versions do not begin
a new paragraph until 7:19. Instead,
they include 7:16c-18 with the
73
Both options are acceptable. The NIV84
makes a paragraph break whenever there is a
change of speaker. You may want to do this
too if it makes it easier for readers to read
the narrative.
7:16c
So: The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates so is . The angel answered
Daniel’s question. English versions
translate it in different ways:
(1) The connector introduces a result:
so (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89, GW,
TEV, NCV, NIV84, NJB)
(2) The connector introduces the next
event in the event line:
and (CEV95)
(3) The version does not use a
connector.
no connector (NLT96)
Option (1) is recommended. Translate
this connector in a way that is most
natural in your language.
he told me and made known to me the
interpretation: The author used to
speech formulas to introduce the
quotation. This may be redundant in
some languages. However, in Hebrew it
adds emphasis to what the angel was
about to say. Some ways English
versions translate this are:
he told me and interpreted for me
the meaning of the vision
-OR-
he spoke with me and revealed to
me the interpretation of the vision:
(NET08)
he told me: The Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates told is the general verb
that means, “to say.”
Other ways
English versions translate this verb are:
he spoke with me (NET08)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
74
-OR-
-OR-
he spoke to me (Collins)
he told me the meaning (TEV)
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates so is . English
versions translate it differently:
(1) It introduces a clause that repeats
the idea in the previous clause, but
with more detail.
and (KJV, RSV52, ESVUS16,
NCV, NIV84, NIV11, NET08)
(2) It introduces a clause that tells what
the attendant said.
that (NRSV89, Lucas)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. A
number of English versions omit the
connector and combine the two clauses
(TEV, CEV95, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
REB89).
made known: The Aramaic verb that
the RSV52 translates made known is a
synonym to the Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates told. 490 The following
are ways some English versions translate
it:
made known (KJV, RSV52, REB89,
Steinmann)
-OR-
explained (NLT96, CEV95, NCV)
-OR-
revealed (NJB, NLT07)
-OR-
told
Some English versions change the order
of the two clauses. For example:
So he told me the meaning. He said,
… (TEV)
-OR-
So he told me what all this meant.
He said, …(GW).
In some languages, it may be more
natural to combine the two verbs. For
example:
So he told me what all this meant
(GW)
-OR-
He explained to me like this:
(NLT96, NLT11)
-OR-
and he explained, (CEV95)
Translate this clause in a way that is
natural in your language.
This clause introduces a quote. English
versions show this in different ways.
(1) Some versions end the sentence
with a comma
and he explained, (CEV95)
(2) Some versions end the sentence
with a colon (NJPS85, NRSV89,
NIV84, NLT96).
explained
(NLT96)
it
to
me
like
this:
Languages have different ways to
introduce direct speech. 491 Translate this
sentence in a way that is natural in your
language.
7:17
In this verse the angel began to explain the
meaning of the vision to Daniel.
These four great beasts: See the Notes at
7:3a. The Aramaic phrase that the
RSV52 translates These four great beasts
is literally, “these great beasts which are
four” (NASB).
English versions
translate this phrase in different ways:
(1) Most English versions interpret this
phrase as the subject of the clause
(RSV, TEV, CEV95, NCV, GW,
NLT96, NLT07, REB89, NIV84,
NIV11, NJB, Lucas, Goldingay,
Steinmann). For example:
These four huge beasts (NLT96)
(2) Some modern versions interpret this
phrase as introducing a new topic.
As for these four great beasts
(NRSV89). 492
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
are: The English verb are is not in the
Aramaic text. It is implied by the
Consultant Notes on Daniel
context. English versions use different
verbs to complete this implied idea. 493
are (KJV, RSV52, ESVUS16, GW,
TEV, CEV95, NCV, NJB, NIV84,
NIV11)
-OR-
represent (NLT96, NLT07) 494
-OR-
(1) Most English versions add an
implied relative pronoun here. For
example:
that (GW, NLT96, NCV. NIV84, )
-OR-
who (RSV52, NJB)
-OR-
which (KJV, REB89, TEV)
refer to
(2) Some English versions translate
literally. They do not add a relative
pronoun.
-OR-
which are …(NET08)
-OR-
that are…(Steinmann)
-OR-
of which there
Goldingay)
75
are…
(Lucas,
Use a verb that is most natural in your
language to translate this idea.
four kings: There is a textual problem at
this verse. 495 The MT has the word
“kings.” The Greek and Latin versions
have “kingdoms.” English versions
interpret this phrase in at least two
ways: 496
(1) The beasts are “four kings.” The
MT is accepted as coherent. The
change to “kingdoms” may have
been an assimilation to 7:23.
four kings (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, NJB, Lucas, Steinmann,
Collins, Goldingay, CTAT)
(2) The beasts are “four kingdoms.”
See also the Notes at 2:39a.
four kingdoms (NLT96, REB89,
GW, CEV95, NCV, NJPS85,
NIV84) 497
-OR-
four empires (TEV)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
However, interpretation (2) is also true.
In Daniel 7:23, the speaker called the
fourth beast a kingdom. It seems that in
Daniel 7, a beast could symbolize both a
kingdom and the ruler of the kingdom at
the same time. The four kings represent
the kingdoms they ruled. 498
who: The verb who is not in the Aramaic
text.
four kingdoms will arise out of the
earth (NJPS85)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Translate the connector in a way that is
natural in your language.
shall arise: The Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates shall arise literally
means, “to rise, stand up.” 499 English
versions interpret this verb differently:
(1) This verb has the figurative
meaning: “will rule.” 500 See the
Notes at 2:39a.
that will rise to power (GW)
-OR-
come to rule
(2) It means, “occur, appear.”
that will occur one after each
other 501
-OR-
that will come from the earth (NCV)
-OR-
Who will appear on the earth (BDS)
(3) Some translate the literal meaning,
“rise, arise.” (NJB, NJPS85,
REB89, RSV52, NRSV89, KJV,
ESVUS16, NET08, NLT07, NIV84,
NIV11, NJB, TEV, Steinmann,
Lucas, Goldingay, Collins).
who will rise up (NJB)
-OR-
which will arise (REB89)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
out of the earth: The Aramaic word that
the RSV52 translates out of can have
different meanings. 502
(1) It means, “on.”
on the earth (GW, NAB)
-OR-
on earth (TEV)
(2) It describes the word “kingdom.”
earthly kingdoms (CEV95)
-OR-
world empires 503
-OR-
That will have an earthly origin
(BFrCL)
(3) It means, “out of” (KJV, RSV52,
NRSV89, NJPS85).
out of the earth (ESVUS16)
(4) It means, “from” (NIV84, NLT96,
REB89, NJB).
from the earth (NIV84, NIV11,
HCSB03)
Interpretation (1) and (2) are good. This
phrase may imply that these kingdoms
were world empires.
7:18a
But: The Aramaic connector that the RSV52
translates but is . English versions
interpret this connector in at least two
ways:
(1) It introduces a contrast. Although
the four kings would rule,
eventually God would establish a
new kingdom that would take their
place.
But (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, GW, REB89, CEV95,
NIV84, NIV11, Steinmann, Lucas,
Goldingay)
-OR-
But in the end (NLT96, NLT07)
504
(2) It introduces the next event in the
narrative.
And (TEV)
-OR-
then (NJPS85)
76
-OR-
After them 505
Interpretation (1) is recommended. 506
Translate a connector that shows this
contrast.
the saints of the Most High shall receive
the kingdom: See the Notes below for
how commentators have interpreted each
part of this clause. In some languages it
may be necessary to make explicit who
gave them the kingdom. 507 If that is true
in your language, you may say:
God will give the power to rule to
the people who belong to the
Highest One
-OR-
The Ancient of Days will give those
who are consecrated to the Most
High the authority to rule
Translate this in a way that is most
natural in your language.
saints of the Most High: The way you
translate this phrase will depend on the
way you translate saints. See the note
below. Scholars interpret this phrase in
different ways:
(1) Translate the two terms as a
possessive or objective genitive:
the people who belong to the Most
High (NCV)
-OR-
those who are dedicated to the Most
High
-OR-
those who are consecrated to the
Most High
-OR-
those who belong to the Most High
-OR-
Those who follow faithfully the
Most High
(2) Translate the second
modifying the first. 508
term
as
saints who are on high
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
saints: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates saints comes from the
word that means “holy.” It almost
Consultant Notes on Daniel
always refers to angels in the Old
Testament. 509 However, there are strong
arguments that it does not have that
meaning here. 510 Scholars interpret this
phrase in different ways.
(1) It refers generally to those people
who are faithful, consecrated to the
use or purpose of the Most High. 511
(2) It refers to the people of Israel. 512
(3) It refers to angels (4:17). 513
(4)
It refers to both humans and
angels. 514
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
saints: The Aramaic word that the RSV
translates saints comes from the word
“holy.” However, the word holy is often
misunderstood and misinterpreted. 515
Gentry explains that, “the basic meaning
of the word is “consecrated” or
“devoted.” In Scripture it operates within
the context of covenant relationships and
expresses commitment.” 516 Other ways
to translate this term are:
(1) Translate the meaning of the word
“holy”.
the people who belong to the Most
High (FrCL97)
-OR-
the people who are faithful to the
Most High
77
consecrated, belong to or are faithful to
the Most High. 519
Most High: The Aramaic word that
the RSV52 translates Most High is
. It occurs here and in 7:22, 25b,
27. It comes from the Hebrew word for
“highest” but has an Aramaic plural
ending. This title is different from the
word translated Most High which occurs
in 7:25a and the rest of the Aramaic part
of Daniel (2:4-7:28). 520 Scholars interpret
this word in different ways:
(1) This title refers to a divine figure.
The author wanted to distinguish this
person from God in some way
(Gentry, Hamilton). 521
the Most High
(2) It refers to God. 522
God Most High (CEVUS06)
-OR-
The Supreme God (GNTD)
(3) It is an adjective.
the
holy
ones
(Goldingay) 523
on
high
-OR-
most high holy ones
(4) Bejon translates this phrase as “of
the high places.” 524
saints of the high places (Bejon)
-OR-
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
those who are dedicated to the Most
High
There are different ways to translate this
title:
-OR-
those who are consecrated to the
Most High
(2) Most English versions translate the
word “holy” which may imply these
people were sinless, or morally or
ethically righteous.
holy ones (NRSV89,
NJPS85, NJB) 517
REB89,
-OR-
holy people (GW, NLT96, NCV) 518
Option (1) is recommended.
The
Aramaic word that the RSV52 translates
saints refers to people who are
(1) Translate the two titles differently.
For example:
• The GW uses Most High here
and 7:22, 25b, 27 but Most High
God in 7:25a and elsewhere in
Daniel.
• The NASB uses “the Highest
One” here and in 7:22, 25b, 27
and the Most High in 7:25a and
elsewhere in Daniel.
• Translate the Most High here
and in 7:22, 25b, 27, but God or
the Ancient of Days in 7:25a.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
(2) Translate the two titles in the same
way or as referring to the same
person. For example, the KJV,
RSV52,
NRSV89,
ESVUS16,
NLT96, NLT07, REB89, NJPS85,
NIV84, NIV11, NET08, NJB use
Most High for both terms.
78
the kingdom: The Aramaic word that
the RSV52 translates kingdom can have
different meanings. For example:
(1) It can refer to the abstract idea of
kingship, or sovereignty. 529
royal power (TEV, NJB)
-OR-
Option (1) is recommended. Translate
this title in a way that is most natural in
your language.
the kingly power (REB89)
-OR-
power to rule (NCV)
-OR-
shall receive: In Daniel 2:6 the same
verb is used with the meaning, “to
receive” gifts. 525 In this context, the verb
receive is used in a figurative way. 526
Scholars have interpreted it in different
ways:
the kingship (Lucas, Goldingay)
(2) It can refer to a realm. This is the
meaning in Daniel 2:39-40 and
other places in Daniel. 530
For
example:
kingdom
(RSV52,
NRSV89,
ESVUS16, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
CEV95, NJPS85, NIV84, NIV11,
Steinmann, Collins)
(1) It means, “to receive authority or
power to rule.” The saints began to
rule the kingdom.
will receive
(REB89)
the
kingly
power
(3) It can refer to a king’s reign. 531
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
-OR-
will receive royal power (TEV)
-OR-
will receive the power to rule
(NCV)
(2) It means, “to become subjects of
this kingdom.” Following this view,
the saints inhabited this kingdom.
(3) It means, “to seize by force.” 527
Following this view, the saints
conquered the kingdom.
shall take (KJV)
-OR-
will take possession (GW, NET08)
-OR-
shall seize
528
Interpretation 1 is recommended.
In
some languages it may be necessary to
include the person who gave them this
power. If this is true in your language,
you may say:
God will give power to rule to the
people who are faithful to the Most
High.
-OR-
the Ancient One will give those who
are consecrated to the Most High
authority to rule
7:18b
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context, it introduces a clause that
explains how long they will possess the
kingdom. Most English versions translate
and.
and (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
REB89, TEV, NCV, CEV95,
NIV84, NIV11, NJB, NJPS85)
Translate this connector in a way that is
natural in your language.
possess:
The Aramaic verb has been
interpreted in different ways:
(1) The Aramaic verb that the RSV52
translates possess means, “to take
possession of, occupy.” 532 It has
been translated in different ways:
they will take hold (Goldingay,
Lucas)
-OR-
will take possession (NET08)
(2) It means, “to have, keep.”
Consultant Notes on Daniel
keep (GW, TEV)
-OR-
will have (NCV)
-OR-
possess (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, NJPS85, NIV84, NIV11,
Steinmann)
(3) It means, “to rule.”
they will rule (NLT96)
Each of the options are good.
the kingdom: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates kingdom is repeated
from 7:18a.
(1) In this context it means, “realm.”
Here it has a different meaning from
that in 7:18a.
(2) It has the meaning, “power to rule”
as in 7:18a (NCV)
kingship (Lucas, Goldingay)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
for ever, for ever and ever: The Aramaic
phrase that the RSV52 translates for ever,
for ever, and ever is a superlative. It
refers to an extremely long time in the
future. It will never end. English
versions translate it differently.
forever and ever (GW, NLT96,
TEV, NJB)
-OR-
always, for ever and ever (REB89)
-OR-
forever, for now on (NCV)
-OR-
eternally
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
Comment on the Holy Ones/Saints:
Traditionally, the phrase the holy ones/
saints refers to God’s people. This has been
the view of the Church until the early part of
the twentieth century.
One of the major arguments against the
traditional view is that when the adjective
‘holy’ is used as a noun in the
Hebrew Bible it usually refers to angelic
79
beings. The only counter example is Psalms
34:10 [34:9] and perhaps Deuteronomy 33:2
and Psalms 16:3. While the use of holy
ones to refer to humans is rare, the
deciding factor must be the context of
Daniel 7.
Arguments in favor of the traditional view
include the following: 533
1.
The Old Testament often describes
Israel as a holy nation (Exodus 19:6)
or as holy (Deuteronomy 7:6; 14:2;
26:19; 28:9. 534
2. The OT promises a great kingdom
that is associated with a Messianic
king who comes to Israel. The son
of man figure in Daniel 7:13 is
related to Israelite kingship. The
OT does not refer to an angelic
kingdom.
3. The phrase people of the holy ones
of the Most High (7:27) should be
interpreted as epexegetical. The
people are the holy ones of the Most
High. This phrase refers to God’s
people. This also implies that the
shorter phrase the holy ones (7:18,
22, 25) refers to people as well.
4. The little horn (7:21, 25) made war
against the holy ones, persecuted
them and caused them to suffer.
This description fits better people
than angels, in spite of the
description in 8:10.
5. There is a relationship between the
“holy ones/saints” in Daniel 7 and
“the people of holiness/a holy
people” in 12:7. Both are persecuted
for “a time, times, and half a
time.” 535
6. The giving of the kingdom and
dominion to the people of the saints
(7:27) would have greater relevance
and encouragement to Daniel and
his readers than if it strictly referred
to the benefit of angelic beings.
The common interpretation of critical
scholars is that the saints/ holy ones in
Consultant Notes on Daniel
Daniel 7 refers to angels. See the discussion
by John J. Collins. 536 Steinmann lists seven
arguments that have been used to support
this view. 537
However Steinmann also
offers counter arguments against each of
these points. 538
a. Some commentators argue that
elsewhere in Daniel the Aramaic
term “holy (one) and its Hebrew
cognate are used only for gods or
celestial beings. (Steinmann gives
an example in Daniel 8:24, where
the term קָ דוֹשׁis used to refer to “the
people of God who are saints” and
nt to celestial beings.) 539
538F
b. Some argue that the Hebrew
adjective קָ דוֹשׁ, “holy (one)” usually
refers to angels when used as a
substantive (Psalms 89:6, 8 (ET
89:5, 70; Job 5:1; 15:15; Zechariah
14:5; Daniel 8:13). (Steinmann
presents counter examples in
Psalms 34:10 and Psalms 16:3). 540
539F
c. It is argued that Qumran literature
and other intertestamental literature
support the angelic interpretation.
(Subsequent research has shown that
Qumran
and
intertestamental
literature have an equal number of
examples where the phrase refers to
human “saints.”) 541
d. Some scholars argue that the
reference to God’s people as
“saints,” was not originally part of
the book of Daniel. They suggest
that it was added later by an editor
who reinterpreted the vision.
(However, no manuscript evidence
exists
that
support
this
conjecture.) 542
e. Some scholars argue that the one
like a son of man (7:13-14) is a
heavenly figure and that because
there is a close relationship between
the son of man and “the holy ones,”
“the holy ones” must also be
heavenly beings. (However, the
phrase son of man is normally used
80
in the OT to emphasize a person’s
humanity.) 543
f.
Some scholars argue that the word
“people in 7:27 (“to the people of
the saints of the Most High”) should
be translated “host.” (However,
there are no cases where the Hebrew
word “people” is used to refer
to angels in the OT). 544
g. Some scholars interpret the phrase
“to the people, the saints of the Most
High” as a possessive, “to a people
associated with the holy ones
[angels] of the Most High,” rather
than appositional or epexegetical,
(“to people who are the holy ones of
the Most High”). (However, there is
a textual issue here regarding the
MT accents. One would have to
change the disjunctive (iphah)
accent to a conjunctive accent to
form a three-word construct chain. It
is better to understand the phrase as
a construct chain in apposition to
“the people.”) 545
Steinmann explains that some of these
arguments are false, some inconclusive,
and some require changes in the Hebrew
text. 546 He concludes that the one like a
son of man is not an angelic figure. 547
Baldwin suggests that the most decisive
factor against this view is that the
suffering and defeat that is described of
the “holy ones” in 7:21, 25. 548
The traditional interpretation of the holy
ones/ saints (7:18, 22, 25, 27) is that they
are God’s people. This is the interpretation
that is presented here in the Notes.
Comment on the translation “Most High.”
The term ‘Most High’ (E)in the
phrase “saints of the Most High” is rare and
unusual.
Eis derived from the
Hebrew adjective that means
“highest” and an Aramaic plural ending. It
can be interpreted as a plural of majesty of
Consultant Notes on Daniel
E. It occurs only in Daniel 7:18, 22,
25b, 27.
The title Econtrasts with the term
Ein 7:25a.” 549 Note that although
they are two different words, English
versions usually tend translate them the
same way.
Eis an Aramaic adjective, definite
and singular. It refers to Yahweh, the one
God of Israel. It is found in Daniel 3:26, 32;
5:18, 21 after the word God and in 4:14, 21,
22, 29; 7:25a where it occurs by itself. 550
So why does Daniel use a Hebrew
expression for the Most High in the Aramaic
section of Daniel? Secondly, why does it
occur right next to standard expression in
Aramaic? It there a difference in meaning or
reference? Peter Gentry suggests that “It
seems a deliberate attempt to draw some
distinction between a divine figure
associated with the saints and yet perhaps
distinguished from Yahweh in some way.
Could this be a way of saying that the King
of Israel is God and at the same time to be
distinguished from God in some way?” 551
Daniel 7:27 is particularly revealing:
Then the sovereignty, power, and
greatness of all the kingdoms
under heaven will be given to the
holy people of the Most High.
His kingdom will last forever,
and all rulers will serve and obey
him.” (ESVUS16)
The third person pronoun his/him is
singular and likely refers to an
individual. 552 The nearest referent is the
Most High (E)The NIV84 gives
a better translation of the last line: “His
kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom,
and all rulers will worship and obey
him.”
Daniel 7:27 is similar to 7:14 and the two
should be compared:
He was given authority, honor,
and sovereignty over all the
nations of the world, so that
people of every race and nation
81
and language would obey him.
His rule is eternal—it will never
end. His kingdom will never be
destroyed (NLT07).
The parallel suggests that the one like a
son of man in 7:14 is identified as the
Most High (E) in 7:27. Hamilton
argues that the similarity between the
statements in Daniel 7:14 and 7:27
suggest that the Most High referred to
with and associated with the
saints in the phrase "saints of the Most
High" is the "one like a son of man.” 553
As a result of this analysis it is suggested
that the two titles Eand E be
translated differently. For example:
•
The GW uses Most High in 7:18, 22,
25b, and 27 but Most High God in
7:25a and elsewhere in Daniel.
•
The NASB uses “the Highest One”
here and in 7:22, 25b, 27 and the
Most High in 7:25a and elsewhere in
Daniel.
Translate the terms in a way that the reader
distinguishes them one from the other.
Paragraph 7:19-22
In this paragraph Daniel asked the angel
about the meaning of the fourth beast, the
ten horns and the little horn. Most modern
English versions begin a new paragraph at
7:19 (NRSV89, ESVUS16, NIV84, NIV11,
GW NLT96, NLT07, REB89, NET08, TEV,
CEV95, NCV).
7:19
This verse repeats much of the information
about the fourth beast from 7:7.
7:19a
“Then: The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates then is . It introduces
the next event in the narrative.
(1) Translate a connector:
Then (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
Consultant Notes on Daniel
REB89, TEV, NCV,
NIV84, NIV11, NJB)
NJPS85,
(2) Do not use a connector (CEV95)
Introduce this new paragraph in a way
that is most natural in your language.
I desired: Most English versions translate
this Aramaic verb as “I wanted” (GW,
NLT96, NLT07, TEV, NIV84, NIV11,
NET08, NJPS85, CEV95, NCV,
Goldingay, Lucas). 554 Bejon translates
the verb “sought.” 555
to know the truth concerning the fourth
beast: See the Notes at 7:16a. The
Aramaic verb that the RSV52 translates
to know the truth means, “to make
certain, to find out the precise details.” 556
English versions translate this clause in
two ways:
(1) It refers to the meaning of the fourth
beast as a metaphor. For example:
The meaning of the fourth beast
(NIV11, NET08)
82
(1) It introduces a relative clause
which (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, TEV, GW, NJPS85,
NIV84, NIV11, NET08)
-OR-
that (REB89, Steinmann)
(2) It introduces a reason.
because (CEV95, NCV)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. In
some languages it may be more natural to
omit the connector and begin a new
sentence. See the examples in the next
note.
was different from: See the Notes at
7:7a. 558 The same Aramaic verb is used
here as in 7:7a. It means “distinct.”
Other ways English versions translate
this are:
was different (RSV52, NRSV89,
REB89, NCV, CEV95, NJPS85,
NIV84, NJB).
-OR-
was so different (GW)
-OR-
-OR-
the true meaning of the fourth beast
(NLT96, NIV84, NJPS85, similarly
Goldingay)
was not like any of the others (TEV)
-OR-
what the fourth beast meant (NCV)
In some languages it may be more
natural to translate this clause as a
separate sentence.
-OR-
more exactly about the
beast 557
fourth
(2) It refers to the truth about the fourth
beast (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89).
However, this could imply that
Daniel was uncertain whether parts
of the vision were true.
the truth concerning the fourth beast
(RSV52, NRSV89, similarly the
ESVUS16, Lucas, Collins)
-OR-
to be certain about the fourth beast
(Steinmann)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
It differed from …
-OR-
It was absolutely different…
-OR-
It was completely different …
Translate in a way that is most natural in
your language.
all the rest: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates rest refers to the first
three beasts. Other ways English versions
translate this are:
from all the others (GW, NCV,
REB89, NIV84, NIV11, NET08,
Lucas, Goldingay)
-OR-
7:19b
which: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates which is . Scholars
have interpreted it in different ways:
than the others (CEV95)
-OR-
from them all (NJPS85)
-OR-
from the other three beasts
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
from the rest (ESVUS16)
83
devoured and broke in pieces (TEV,
NLT96).
which crushed its victims with its
bronze claws and iron teeth (TEV)
7:19c
In 7:19c, Daniel began to describe how the
fourth beast was different from the other
beasts.
exceedingly terrible: See the Notes at 7:7a.
The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates terrible describes something
that makes people very afraid. It refers
to something that is “dreadful.” 559 The
beast was aggressive and destructive.
English versions translate this in different
ways.
exceeding dreadful (KJV)
-OR-
exceedingly terrifying (NRSV89,
ESVUS16)
-OR-
very terrifying (GW, NJB)
-OR-
and so terrifying (NLT96, NLT07)
-OR-
very frightening (Steinmann)
In some languages it may be more
natural to begin a new sentence at this
verse part. For example:
It was very terrible (NCV)
7:19d
with its teeth of iron: See the Notes at
7:7b. The Aramaic phrase that the
RSV52 translates with its iron teeth is
literally, “teeth of iron.” The fourth beast
had teeth that were made of iron.
English versions translate this in two
ways:
(1) The phrase refers back to the
previous clause. It describes why
the fourth beast was so terrible
(RSV52, NRSV89, GW, REB89,
NCV, NIV84, NJB)
and had teeth of iron (NCV)
-OR-
with its iron teach (NIV84, NIV11)
(2) The phrase refers ahead to the next
clause. It tells how the beast
Interpretation (1) is recommended. In
some languages it may be natural to
translate this clause as a new sentence:
Its teeth were of iron (Steinmann)
-OR-
It had iron teeth
iron: See the Notes at 2:33a; 7:7b. Iron
was the most common and useful metal.
Although iron was less in value than
gold, silver and bronze, people valued it
for its superior strength. People used
iron to make tools and weapons. In this
verse, the word is used in a figurative
way. It symbolized power and ability to
destroy. The same word was used to
describe the iron legs of the statue in
2:33a, 40a.
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . It connects
the bronze claws with the iron teeth.
Translate this connector in a way that is
natural in your language.
claws of bronze: This aspect of the fourth
beast was not described in 7:7. The beast
had claws like a bird’s claws. 560 See the
Notes at 4:33f. These were not ordinary
claws. They were made of a metal called
bronze.
bronze: See the Notes at 2:32c. The
Aramaic word that the RSV52 translates
bronze can refer to either bronze or
copper. Most English versions have
bronze. Bronze is stronger than copper
and
has a reddish brown color. 561
People used bronze to make tools and
weapons. If your language does not have
a word for bronze, you may:
(1) use a national language word for
bronze.
(2) use a phrase like: “a reddish brown
metal.”
Translate this term in a way that is most
natural in your language.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
7:19e
Breaking [its victims] in pieces
(Bejon)
and which: There is no connector in the
Aramaic text. There are different ways
to translate this:
-OR-
crushing its victims (Similarly,
GW, NLT96)
-OR-
(1) Translate a connector that refers
back to the beast
and which… (RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16)
-OR-
And it… (NET08)
crunching
Goldingay)
NET08,
(REB89,
Lucas,
(2) The beast crushed its victims with
its great iron teeth (TEV,
CEV95). 563
crushed its victims with its bronze
claws and iron teeth (TEV)
(2) Begin a new sentence
It … (GW,
Steinmann)
84
NLT07,
-OR-
The beast …
Both options are good. Translate this
connection in a way that is most natural
in your language.
devoured: See the Notes at 7:5d; 7:7c. The
Aramaic verb that that the RSV52
translates devour is literally, “eat.” It has
a participlial form implying continuous
action. In this context, the word implies
to “eat up hungrily or voraciously.” It
may imply continuous action here. For
example:
devouring (REB89, Lucas)
-OR-
eating (Goldingay)
-OR-
consuming (Bejon)
and: There is no connector in the Aramaic
text. The RSV52 adds this connector to
make this clause more natural in English.
In this context, it introduces a clause that
tells how the beast ate its victims. You
may translate a connector too if the
connection is more natural in your
language.
broke in pieces: The Aramaic verb that that
the RSV52 translates broke in pieces
means, “to crush.” It may describe a
continuous action. 562 There are two
interpretations:
(1) The text does not say exactly how
the beast crushed its victims.
Interpretation (1) is probably best.
Comment on 7:19d: In some languages it
may be necessary to add implied
information. For example:
It devoured and crushed its victims
(NLT96, NLT07)
In some languages it may be more natural to
change the order of the verbs. For example:
that crushed and ate what it killed
(NCV)
-OR-
That crushed and devoured its
victims (NIV84, NIV11)
Translate in a way that is most natural in
your language.
7:19f
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context, it tells the next action in the
sequence. Most English versions use a
connector:
and (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, GW, NLT96, NJPS85,
NJB, NJPS85, NIV84, NIV11,
NJBNIV, GW)
-OR-
then (REB89)
-OR-
and then (TEV, NCV)
Translate the connector in a way that is
most natural in your language.
stamped the residue with its feet: See the
Notes at 7:7d. The Aramaic verb that the
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
RSV52 translates stamped means, “to
tread down” with one’s feet. It may
describe a continuous action. 564
and trampling
remains (Lucas)
underfoot
what
-OR-
and trampling underfoot what was
left (Goldingay)
And I wanted to know about the ten
horns on its head and the horn that
had come up…. (TEV)
The text implies a question. In some
languages it may be more natural to
make this question explicit.
For
example:
-OR-
I also asked about the ten horns on
the fourth beast’s head and the little
horn that …(NLT96, NLT07)
trampling their remains beneath its
feet (NLT02)
-OR-
trampling what was left of them
with its feet
the residue: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates residue refers to what
is left or what remains of something. 565
In this context, it refers to what was left
of his victims that the beast had not
crushed or eaten. For example:
what was left (NRSV89, similarly
GW, NCV, Steinmann, Goldingay)
-OR-
whatever was left (NIV84, NIV11)
-OR-
the remains (NJPS85, similar NJB)
-OR-
the remainder (Collins)
-OR-
them (“the victims”)
7:20
In this verse, Daniel inquired about the
meaning of the ten horns (7:7e) and the little
horn (7:8). The angel answered about the
fourth beast in 7:24a and about the little
horn in 7:24b-25d. 566
85
concerning the ten horns that were on
its head: See the Notes at 7:7e. Daniel
referred to the ten horns on the head of
the fourth beast. The word horn is a
common metaphor in the Old Testament
for power and authority. In this context
it refers to ten powerful kings. 568
7:20b
and the other horn which came up: The
Aramaic connector that the RSV52
translates and is . It introduces
another horn which came up on the head
of the fourth beast. Daniel wanted to
know about this horn too. Daniel wanted
to know the true meaning of the little
horn that came up among the other horns.
See the Notes at 7:7a. There are at least
two ways to translate this:
•
Translate the connector (KJV,
RSV52, NRSV89, NLT96, REB89,
NIV84, NJPS85, NJB, GW).
and about the other horn that came
up (GW)
-OR-
7:20a
and concerning the ten horns that were
on its head: The Aramaic connector that
the RSV52 translates and is . It
introduces the topic of the ten horns and
the little horn which Daniel wanted to
know more about. In some languages it
may be more natural to begin a new
sentence and to add implied information.
For example:
I also wanted to know the true
meaning of the ten horns that were
on its head and… 567
and about the little horn that came
up afterward (NLT96)
-OR-
and the horn that had come up
afterward and had made three of the
horns fall (GNTD)
-OR-
and the eleventh horn that emerged
at the end 569
•
Add the implied information and
begin a new sentence.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
I especially wanted to know more
about the one that took the place of
three of the others (CEV95)
-OR-
I also wanted to ask about the horn
that came up afterwards and which
caused three of the ten horns to fall.
Translate this clause in a way that is most
natural in your language. 570
horn: In the O.T. the figure of a horn
comes from a powerful animal like a ram
or goat which lifts its head high.
Normally a horn symbolizes power and
strength. Here in this context, it may
also symbolizes pride and rebellion. 571
In some translations it may be helpful to
put this information in a footnote.
came up: See the Notes at 7:8b. The
little horn came up from the head of the
beast. English versions translate this
verb in different ways:
came up (RSV52, NRSV89, NLT96,
NIV84, similarly the GW)
86
NRSV89, NLT96, TEV REB89,
NJB, GW). For example:
and made three of the horns fall
(TEV)
(2) You may begin a new sentence:
At the same time, it caused three of
the other horns to fall.
Translate the connection in a way that is
natural in your language.
before which three of them fell: In 7:8a,
Daniel used the verb “plucked up” to
describe this action. In this verse, Daniel
described the action in a different way.
He said that the three horns fell before
the little horn. The context does not say
how they fell. English versions translate
this in different ways:
(1) The context implies that the little
horn displaced the three other horns.
It may imply that the little horn
caused the three others to fall.
had come up afterward (TEV)
and had made three of the horns fall
(TEV) 572
-OR-
-OR-
emerged
and made three of the horns fall out
(GW)
-OR-
Some modern versions use a verb that
describes how plants come up from the
ground. See also the Notes at 7:8b. This
would accord with the verb “plucked up”
in 7:8c. For example:
sprang up (REB89)
-OR-
-OR-
and caused three of the other horns
to fall
(2) It means, “to fall, fall off.” 573 Three
horns fell off the head of the fourth
beast. (NJB, KJV, RSV52).
grew (NCV)
and three original horns fell (NJB)
-OR-
-OR-
sprouted (NJPS85, NJB)
and to make room for which three of
them fell out (NRSV89)
Translate the verb in a way that is most
natural in your language.
7:20c
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . It introduces
an action that is closely linked with the
verb “came up.” There are at least two
ways to translate this:
(1) Most English versions translate the
connector and (KJV, RSV52,
(3) It has the figurative meaning, “to
destroy.”
and destroyed three of the other
horns (NLT96, NLT07)
(4) It means, “to take the place.”
took the place of three of the others
(CEV95)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
three of them: This phrase refers to
three of the ten horns (kings). 574
Consultant Notes on Daniel
87
7:20d
the horn which had eyes: The phrase is
literally “and this horn and eyes to it.”
The RSV52 does not translate the
Aramaic connector that begins this
clause. The connector is . In this
context, it introduces a clause that
focuses attention particularly on the little
horn. 575 It was that horn had eyes like a
person. See the Notes at 7:8b. There are
two ways to translate this:
(a) Begin a new clause (GW, NLT96,
REB89)
That horn had eyes (GW, Collins)
-OR-
It was that little horn that had
eyes…
and a mouth that was boasting
proudly (TEV)
-OR-
and a mouth that kept bragging
(NCV)
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
great things: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates great was used in 7:3,
7 to describe an object that was very
large. In this context, it has a figurative
meaning.
English
versions
have
interpreted this in at least two ways:
(1) It has a negative sense (TEV,
CEV95, NCV, NRSV89, NLT96,
NJPS85, NIV84, NJB, REB89).
-OR-
This was the
eyes…(NET08)
horn
that
arrogantly
NLT07)
had
proudly (TEV)
Moreover that horn had eyes …
(Steinmann)
-OR-
with great pride (CEV95)
-OR-
(b) Translate with a connector like the
Aramaic does.
boastfully (NIV84, NIV11)
(2) It has a positive sense.
impressive things (GW) 576
-OR-
and that had human eyes (NLT96)
-OR-
the horn that had eyes (NJPS85,
CEV95)
Option (1) is recommended. Translate
this in a way that is most natural in your
language. See also the explanation at
Daniel 7:8b.
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . It introduces
a clause that tells something else about
the little horn. It had a mouth. Most
English versions translate the connector
and (RSV52, NRSV89, ESVUS16, GW,
NLT96, REB89, TEV, CEV95, NCV,
NJPS85, NIV84, NJB).
a mouth that spoke great things: See the
Notes at 7:8c. The little horn also had a
mouth that spoke in a proud and boastful
way. The verb expresses continuous
action. English versions translate this in
different ways. For example:
NLT96,
-OR-
-OR-
and that had eyes (NIV84)
(NRSV89,
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
7:20e
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . It introduces
a clause that describes another thing that
Daniel noticed about the little horn.
•
Translate a connector
and (RSV52, NRSV89, REB89,
CEV95, NCV, NJPS85, NJB, Lucas,
Goldingay)
•
Begin a new sentence
It appeared to be… (GW)
-OR-
It was … (TEV)
Translate in a way that is most natural in
your language.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
which seemed greater than its fellows:
Literally, “its appearance was greater
than its companions.” As Daniel
continued to look, the little horn
appeared greater than the previous ten
horns. 577
The meaning of the word
greater has been interpreted differently:
(1) It seemed more important than the
others
It appeared greater than the other
horns
88
that the RSV52 translates greater can
also have different meanings. 579
(1) In this context, it refers to
something that really impressed
Daniel. The horn was small, but it
was more impressive than the other
horns. It seemed to be more
important than the other horns.
more imposing (REB89, NIV84,
NIV11)
-OR-
-OR-
more impressive (NJB)
It was more impressive than the
other horn
-OR-
-OR-
Its appearance was more imposing
than its companions (TLV)
-OR-
whose appearance was
important than the others
more
(2) It was bigger in size than the others.
It appeared to be bigger than the
others (GW)
(3) It was more frightening than the
others.
It was more terrifying than any of
the others (GNTD)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. The
horn was small in size but it somehow
seemed greater or more important.
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
seemed: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates seemed is literally, “its
appearance.” 578
English
versions
translate this in different ways:
It appeared …(GW)
-OR-
and looked (NCV)
more important
(2) The word can refer to physical size.
bigger (GW, Goldingay)
(3) The word can imply evoking fear.
more terrifying (GNTD)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
fellows: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates fellows means,
“companions.” 580 This English word is
usually to describe people who are
friends or who have gathered together for
some purpose. However, in this context
the word refers to the other horns that
were on the head of the fourth beast. It
refers specifically to the ten other horns.
Most English version translate this word
in a general way that refers back to the
other horns. For example:
others (NRSV89, GW, TEV,
CEV95, NCV, NJPS85, NIV84,
NIV11, NET08, NLT07)
-OR-
the other horns 581
Translate this in a way that is most
natural in your language.
-OR-
It was more impressive
greater: Most English versions translate
this word as greater (RSV52, NRSV89,
NLT96,
NLT07,
NCV,
CEV95,
Steinmann, Lucas, Collins). However,
this English word can be ambiguous. It
can refer to size or to importance. Here
it refers to the latter. The Aramaic word
7:21-22
Scholars differ in the way they interpret
these verses.
(1) These two verses continue the
vision. It introduces an answer to
Daniel’s concern in vv. 15-20. He
wanted to know more about the
Consultant Notes on Daniel
fourth beast, the ten horns and the
little horn.
(2) Some scholars think that these two
verses interrupt the previous
sequence of events. The NJPS85
puts these two verses in parenthesis.
(3) Some scholars think that these two
verses compose a fourth vision in
the chapter. 582
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
7:21
As I looked: See the Notes at 7:2a. The
Aramaic verb that the RSV52 translates
saw is literally, “I was seeing.” 583
English versions translate this in different
ways:
(1) It describes a continuous action.
I kept looking (Steinmann)
with the saints: The Aramaic word is
literally, “holy ones” (). You
should translate this term in the same
way you did in 7:18a. In this context, it
refers to people who were consecrated,
faithful and who belonged to the Most
High.
and: The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates and is . In this context, it
introduces the next event in the narrative.
Most English versions have and (RSV52,
NRSV89, ESVUS16, GW, NLT96,
NLT07, TEV, CEV95, NCV, NJPS85,
NIV84, NIV11).
prevailed over them: The Aramaic word
that the RSV52 translates prevailed
means, “to defeat.” 584 This word has
been translated in at least two ways:
(1) It refers to a continuous action in the
past: 585
-OR-
and was defeating them (NLT96,
NLT07, NCV, similarly GW,
NIV84, NIV11)
As I looked (RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16)
-OR-
-OR-
As I watched (NLT96, NCV, Lucas,
similarly Goldingay)
and was winning the battle (CEV95)
-OR-
-OR-
And was prevailing over them
(NRSV89)
While I was looking (TEV, CEV95)
-OR-
-OR-
While I was watching (NET08)
And was overcoming them (Lucas,
similarly Goldingay)
(2) It is a completed action
I saw (GW)
(2) It refers to a completed act.
-OR-
and conquered them (TEV)
I looked
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
this horn made war: The Aramaic verb
that the RSV52 translates made war
describes a continuous action in the past:
“making war.” The horn is described
like a king, whose army went to war.
English versions translate this in different
ways:
the little horn was making war
(Goldingay)
-OR-
this horn was attacking
-OR-
the little horn was fighting
89
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
them: The pronoun refers back to the
word saints in this clause.
7:22a
until the Ancient of Days came: The
preposition until introduces a clause that
explains how long the action in 7:21
continued. In some languages it maybe
more natural to begin a new sentence.
For example:
Then the one who had been living
forever came (GNTD)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
It did this until the Ancient of Days
... (GW)
•
-OR-
until the Ancient One came.
then (NRSV89)
-OR-
In some languages it may be helpful to
make the contrast explicit. For example,
you can use a connector that shows
contrast:
but the Ancient One came 586
Ancient of Days: The phrase Ancient of
Days is only found in 7:9, 13, 22. In
7:13, 22 it occurs with the definite
article.
English
versions
and
commentators have translated this in
different ways:
(1) Some translate it as a descriptive
phrase:
the one who had been living forever
(GNTD)
(2) Some translate it as a title.
the Ancient of Days (RSV52,
ESVUS16, NIV84, NIV11, NET08,
Cook, Steinmann, Collins)
-OR-
the Ancient One (NRSV89, GW,
NLT07, Lucas)
(3) Some translate it more directly as
God.
the Eternal God (CEVIS06)
-OR-
God who has been alive forever
(NCV)
Options (1) and (2) are good. The phrase
refers to Yahweh, the covenant God of
Israel. However, it is usually best not to
translate the reference explicitly as God.
Translate it the same way you did at
7:22.
Translate the connector:
and (RSV52, ESVUS16, GW,
NLT96, NLT07, TEV, CEV95,
NJPS85, NIV84, NIV11, NET08)
-ORThe horn kept defeating them
Then the Ancient One came
90
•
Begin a new sentence
Then (REB89)
-OR-
He judged… (NCV)
Both options are acceptable. Translate in
a way that is most natural in your
language.
judgment was given for the saints of the
Most High: This is a passive clause. As
in previous contexts, the passive verb
implies God as the agent of the action.
In some languages it may be natural to
translate this as an active clause. 587 For
example:
the Ancient One… judged in favor
of the consecrated people who
belonged to the Highest One
-OR-
the Ancient One judged for the
benefit of the people who were
consecrated to the Most High
Translate this clause in a way that is most
natural in your language. The Aramaic
word that the RSV52 translates Most
High is different from the usual title that
is used in Daniel to describe God. See the
Notes below on how to translate this title.
judgment…for: The Aramaic word that
the RSV52 translates judgment can have
different meanings. 588 In this context, it
means that the judge made a decision in
favor or for the benefit of the saints,
those consecrated to God. English
versions translate this differently.
judged in favor of …(GW, NLT96,
NLT07, CEV95, NCV)
-OR-
7:22b
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and introduces the next
event in the narrative. English versions
translate this in different ways:
pronounced judgment in favor of
…(TEV, NIV84)
saints: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates saints comes from the
word that means “holy.” In this context
Consultant Notes on Daniel
the word holy refers more generally to
those who are consecrated to the Most
High for his special purpose. Translate
this term in the same way you did in
7:18a
Most High: See the Notes at 7:18a.
You should translate this phrase in the
same way you did there. The Aramaic
word that the RSV52 translates here
Most High is . It occurs in 7:18,
7:22, 25b, 27. It comes from the Hebrew
word for “highest” but has an Aramaic
plural ending. This title is different from
the word translated Most High which
occurs in 7:25a and from its use in the
rest of the Aramaic part of Daniel (2:47:28), where it refers to God. 589 Scholars
interpret this word in different ways:
(1) This phrase is a title that refers to a
divine figure. The author wanted to
distinguish this person from God in
some way. 590
•
Option (1) is recommended. Translate
this title in the same way that you did in
7:18.
7:22c
and the time came:
The Aramaic
connector that the RSV52 translates and
introduces the next event in the
narrative. 594 English versions translate
this in different ways:
•
high
Translate a connector that introduce
the next event on the event line:
and the time came (RSV52,
NRSV89, REB89, NIV84)
(3) Some scholars think that this phrase
is used as a modifier.
on
Translate the Most High in 7:18,
22, 25b, 27 and the Ancient of
Days in 7:25a.
(2) Translate the two titles in the same
way or as referring to the same
person. For example, the KJV,
RSV52,
NRSV89,
ESVUS16,
NLT96, NLT07, REB89, NJPS85,
NIV84, NIV11, NET08, NJB use
Most High for both terms.
(2) Some scholars think that his phrase
is another title that refers to God. 591
the
holy
ones
(Goldingay) 592
91
-OR-
then the time came (NCV)
•
Begin a new sentence
-OR-
The time came (GW)
most high holy ones
-OR-
(4) Bejon translates this phrase as “on
the high places.” 593
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
The time had arrived (TEV)
-OR-
Then the time arrived (NLT07)
-OR-
Then the time came (NET08)
There are different ways to translate this
title:
Translate this connection in a way that is
most natural in your language.
(1) Translate the two titles differently.
For example:
• The GW uses Most High in
7:18, 22, 25b, 27 but Most High
God in 7:25a and elsewhere in
Daniel.
• The NASB uses “the Highest
One” in 7:18, 22, 25b, 27 and
the Most High in 7:25a and
elsewhere in Daniel.
time: The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates time refers to a fixed or
appointed time. 595 See the Notes on
“season” at 7:12b.
when:
The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates when is . English
versions interpret this connector in at
least two ways:
(1) It introduces the next event in the
narrative sequence
Consultant Notes on Daniel
when (GW, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, NIV84, NIV11)
92
versions differ in the way they present 7:2327.
-OR-
and (Steinmann)
-OR-
Then (NLT96, NLT07, NET08)
(2) It introduces a purpose
for (NLT96, TEV, CEV95, Lucas,
Goldingay)
Interpretation (1) is
Option (2) is also good.
recommended.
the saints received the kingdom: See the
Notes at 7:18b. The verb means, “to take
possession, occupy.” 596 English versions
translate this clause in different ways.
For example:
the holy ones gained possession of
the kingdom (REB89)
-OR-
Those who were consecrated
faithful to God took possession of
the kingdom
-OR-
Those who were consecrated to God
took over the kingdom
Translate this in a way that is most
natural in your language.
saints: These are the same people as
referred to in 7:22b. See also the Notes
at 7:18a and 7:22b. Translate this term in
the same way you did in 7:22a.
kingdom: See the Notes at 7:18a. The
Aramaic word that the RSV52 translates
kingdom can have different meanings. In
this context, it refers to the kingdom as a
realm. It refers to both the territory and
people they would rule over. 597 Translate
this key term in the same way you did at
7:18b.
Paragraph 7:23-25
In 7:23-25 the person whom Daniel had
previously spoke to (7:15) answered the
questions that Daniel had asked in 7:19-20.
A number of English versions begin a new
paragraph at this verse (NIV84, NIV11,
NRSV89, ESVUS16, NET08, GW, NLT96,
NLT07, REB89, TEV, NCV). English
(1) Some versions present these verses
as normal narrative prose (NIV84,
NIV11, NLT07, NJPS85, TEV,
REB89, Steinmann).
(2) Other versions present these verses
as poetic speech and use a special
form to show this (RSV52,
NRSV89, ESVUS16, NJB, Lucas,
Goldingay).
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
7:23a
“Thus he said: The Aramaic connector that
the RSV52 translates thus can have
different meanings:
(1) It means, “this, in the following
manner.” For example:
This is what he said… (NRSV89,
NJPS85, NJB)
-OR-
He explained it in this way 598
-OR-
He gave me this
(NIV84, NIV11)
explanation
-OR-
This is what he told me (NET08)
-OR-
This is the explanation I was given
(GNTD)
(2) It introduces the next event in the
narrative:
Then he said to me…
NLT11, CEV95)
(NLT96,
Interpretation (1) is recommended. In
some languages, this idea is implied by
the context. If that is true in your
language, you may not have to translate
this word. For example, see the GW.
he said: The pronoun refers back to the
person who was standing near Daniel in
7:16a. Others ways to translate this in
English are:
he said to me (NLT96)
-OR-
he explained this to me (NCV)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
In some languages it may be necessary to
make the subject more explicit.
the person who was standing near
the throne answered me in this way.
-OR-
93
phrase, there are two ways to translate
this clause:
(1) Some interpret the fourth beast as
introducing the topic:
a fourth kingdom shall be on the
earth
The angel explained:
-OR-
7:23b
As for the fourth beast: The Aramaic
phrase that the RSV52 translates As for
the fourth beast is literally, “the fourth
beast.” The speaker has placed this
phrase at the beginning of the clause to
introduce the topic. English versions
interpret this phrase in different ways:
(1) Some versions interpret the phrase
as introducing a new topic:
As for the fourth beast (RSV52,
NRSV89, ESVUS16, Collins) 599
-OR-
Regarding the fourth beast (Cook)
-OR-
I will tell you about the fourth beast.
-OR-
The fourth
…(NET08)
beast
means
that
-OR-
The
fourth
Goldingay)
beast:
(Lucas,
(2) Some versions interpret this phrase
as the subject of the clause
The fourth beast … (NIV84, NIV11,
NLT96, REB89, TEV, CEV95,
NJPS85, NJB, Steinmann).
-OR-
The fourth animal … (NCV, GW)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
However,
both
translations
are
acceptable. The second option is more
natural in English. However, in other
languages it may be more natural to
present the topic first as in (1). Translate
this phrase in a way that is natural in
your language.
there shall be a fourth kingdom: The
phrase is literally: “a fourth kingdom
shall come on the earth.” Depending
upon how you translated the previous
there shall be a fourth kingdom on
earth (NRSV89)
-OR-
a fourth kingdom will come to be on
the earth (Cook)
-OR-
a fourth kingdom will rule the earth
(2)
Some interpret the phrase fourth
beast as the subject:
The fourth beast is a fourth
kingdom (NIV84, NCV)
-OR-
The fourth beast is a fourth world
power (NLT11)
-OR-
he fourth animalwill be the
fourth of these kingdoms (GW)
-ORsignifies
a
kingdom…(REB89)
fourth
-OR-
The fourth beast means there will
be a fourth kingdom (NET08,
NJPS85)
-OR-
The fourth beast represents a
fourth earthly kingdom 600
Option (1) is recommended. However,
both
translations
are
acceptable.
Translate this phrase in a way that is
natural in your language.
kingdom:
The Aramaic word the
RSV52 translates kingdom can have
different meanings. See the Notes at
7:14a.
(1) It can refer to the abstract idea of
kingship.
world power (NLT96, NLT07)
-OR-
empire (GND)
(2) It can refer to the place (realm) and
the people that a king ruled over.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
kingdom (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, NIV84, NIV11)
all other empires (TEV)
-OR-
(3) It can refer to a king’s reign.
Interpretation (1) is recommended,
however, (2) and (3) are also implied.
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
on earth: English versions have
translated this phrase in different ways:
that will appear on earth (NIV84)
94
all those kingdoms which ruled
before
7:23d
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context, it introduces the second thing
that the person said to Daniel. English
versions translate this in two ways.
-OR-
that will come on the earth (NCV)
-OR-
that will be on earth (TEV)
-OR-
that will rule the earth (NLT96,
NLT07)
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
7:23c
which shall be different from all the
kingdoms: See the Notes at 7:19a. The
fourth beast shall be completely different
from the first three beasts. He will be
unique. Other ways English versions
translate this are:
that shall be different (NRSV89)
-OR-
and will be different from …(TEV)
In some languages it may be more
natural to translate this clause as a
separate sentence.
It will be different from … (GW,
NLT96, NLT07, NIV84, NIV11,
CEV95, similarly the NCV)
-OR-
It will differ from (REB89)…
all the kingdoms: This phrase refers to
the first three kingdoms that were
mentioned earlier.
Other ways to
translate this are:
all the other kingdoms (NRSV89,
NJB, NET08, NIV84, NIV11, GW,
NCV)
-OR-
all the others (NLT96, NLT07,
CEV95)
(1) Translate a connector
and
(NRSV89, NCV, NIV84,
NIV11)
(2) Begin a new sentence
It will devour… (GW, NLT96,
NIV07, NET08, NJPS85)
Translate this connector in a way that is
most natural in your language.
it shall devour the whole earth: See the
Notes at 7:19d. The Aramaic verb that
that the RSV52 translates devour is
literally, “eat.” In this context, the word
implies, “to eat up hungrily or
voraciously.” 601 Most English versions
have
devour
(RSV52,
NRSV89,
ESVUS16, GW, NLT96, NLT07,
REB89, NIV84, NIV11, NJB)
In some languages it is not natural to say
that a kingdom or beast will eat the
world. If that is true in your language,
you may have to translate the meaning
more directly. For example:
and will take over all the world
-OR-
and will take control of all the earth.
Translate this in a way that is most
natural in your language.
the whole world: There are two ways to
translate this phrase in English.
(a) Translate it after the first verb:
It will devour the whole world
(NLT96)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
It will devour the whole earth
(REB89)
(b) Translate it after the third verb:
It will devour, trample, and crush
the whole world (GW)
Both ways are good. Translate in a way
that is most natural in your language.
world: The Aramaic word that the RSV
translates world can have different
meanings. In this context does not simply
refer to the physical earth, but to all the
people who live on it and all that belongs
to them. Translate this idea in a way that
is natural in your language.
7:23e
and trample it down:
This verb is a
synonym of Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates stamped in 7:19e.
This verb means, “tread down, tread
under.” 602 It compares a strong army to a
herd of animals that run over everything
in its way. Other ways to translate this
are:
trample (GW, NJB)
-OR-
tread it down (NJPS85, similarly
REB89)
95
Note at 7:23d for how to interpret the
meaning..
7:24a
The verse has a similar structure as in 7:23be. The topic is introduced first and then a
comment about the topic.
There are
different ways to translate this.
As for the ten horns: The Aramaic
connector that the RSV52 translates as
for is .
English versions have
interpreted this phrase in different ways:
(1) The phrase introduces the topic of
the sentence (RSV52, NRSV89,
NJB,
ESVUS16,
Steinmann,
Collins, Lucas, Goldingay).
Regarding the ten horns from the
kingdom (Cook)
-OR-
As for the ten horns (NJB)
-OR-
The ten horns: (Lucas, Goldingay)
(2) The phrase introduces the subject of
the sentence (GW, NLT96, NLT07,
REB89, TEV, NIV84, NIV11,
NJPS85, CEV95, NCV, GND).
The ten horns are … (GW, TEV,
NCV, NIV84)
-OR-
-OR-
The ten horns signify … (REB89)
trampling it down (NIV84, NIV11)
-OR-
The idea of this figure is that the fourth
kingdom will cruelly destroy all those
people who oppose it.
and break it to pieces: See the Notes at
7:19d. Other ways English versions
translate this are:
and crushing it (REB89, NIV84)
-OR-
and crush it to pieces (CEV95)
-OR-
breaking it to pieces (Lucas)
-OR-
and smash it (Steinmann)
This fourth kingdom will cause great
destruction. The pronoun it in these
clauses refers back to the earth. See the
The ten horns represent …
603
-OR-
And the ten horns [mean] …
(NJPS85)
Option (1) is recommended. However,
both
translations
are
acceptable.
Translate in a way that is most natural in
your language.
out of this kingdom ten kings shall arise:
The phrase is literally: “from it the
kingdom ten kings will arise.”
Depending upon how you translated the
previous phrase, there are two ways to
translate this clause:
(1) Interpret this as an independent
clause (RSV52, NRSV89, NJB,
Collins, Lucas, Goldingay) 604 The
Consultant Notes on Daniel
kingdom refers back to the ten
horns.
From that kingdom ten kings shall
arise (Collins)
(2) The phrase kingdom refers to realm
where the ten kings shall rule. For
example:
the ten kings in this kingdom shall
rule 607
-OR-
out of this kingdom ten kings shall
arise (NRSV89)
-OR-
ten kings who will rule that
empire (TEV)
-OR-
from this kingdom shall rise ten
kings (NJB)
-OR-
From this same kingdom ten kings
shall arise (Lucas)
(2) Supply an implied verb. (GW, TEV,
NCV, NIV84, REB89, NJPS85,
CEV95). The ten horns are ten
kings.
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
shall arise Scholars interpret this verb in
different ways.
(1) It means, “to rule.” 608
ten kings that will rise to power
from that kingdom (GW)
-OR-
ten kings who will rule from that
empire
The ten horns are ten kings who
will rule that empire
-OR-
(2) The verb means, “to come from.”
The ten horns represent ten kings
who will rule the kingdom
ten kings who will come from this
kingdom (CEV95, NIV84)
-OR-
-OR-
The ten horns mean that ten kings
in this realm would rule 605
ten kings who will come from this
fourth kingdom (NCV)
-OR-
From it – the kingdom – ten kings
will arise (Steinmann)
-OR-
(3) It literally means, “to rise up from”
(NJPS85, RSV52, NRSV89, NJB)
who will rise from this kingdom
(REB89)
Ten kings will come to rule this
kingdom
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
However, the second interpretation is
probably implied. As a result, both
options are acceptable. Scholars differ as
to whether the ten kings ruled at the same
time or if they succeeded each other. 606
They probably ruled in succession,
however, it may be best not to make this
explicit.
out of this kingdom: The word kingdom
refers to the fourth kingdom. This phase
has been interpreted in different ways:
(1) The phrase refers to the kingdom
from which the ten kings shall come
to rule.
from that kingdom (GW, TEV, NJB,
REB89, similarly CEV95)
-OR-
from this fourth kingdom (NCV)
96
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
7:24b
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates as for is . In this
context, it introduces the next event in
the narrative. Modern versions translate
this connector in different ways:
(a) The connector introduces the next
event:
and (RSV52, NRSV89, CEV95,
NJPS85, NJB, Steinmann)
-OR-
then (NLT96, NLT07, GNTD)
-OR-
after them (REB89, NIV84, NIV11)
(b) Begin a new sentence at this verse
Another king….(GW, TEV)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
another king will rise to power after
them (GW)
Then another king … (TEV)
(c) The connector introduces a contrast:
•
but (GCLNR00, Lucas, Goldingay) .
Options (a) and (b) are good. Translate
the connector in a way that is most
natural in your language.
Another shall arise after them: See the
English versions
Notes at 7:24a.
translate this phrase in different ways:
(1) In this context, the verb means, “to
rule.”
Another king shall rise to power
after them (GW)
-OR-
Another king will rule after them
(2) It means, “to come.”
Then another king will appear
(TEV)
-OR-
and one more will follow (CEV95)
-OR-
another will come (NCV)
•
•
Omit this idea if the meaning is
implied by the context (NLT96,
TEV, CEV95)
Translate in a way that is most natural in
your language.
them: The pronoun refers back to the
ten kings mentioned in 7:24a.
7:24c
The RSV52 does not translate the connector
that is in the Aramaic text. This
connector introduces a clause that describes
the eleventh king. English versions translate
this in different ways.
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
•
Translate a connector
who will
Begin a new sentence
He will … (GW, TEV, NCV,
NJPS85)
-OR-
This one (NJB)
Translate the connector in a way that is
most natural in your language.
An eleventh king 609
-OR-
NIV11,
Scholars differ in their interpretation of
the person who this might refer to in
history. 610 It is best to translate generally
and not make explicit who you may think
this eleventh king is.
after them: English versions translate
this phrase in different ways.
For
example, you may:
•
Add the implied information
After those kings are gone (NCV)
•
another: This word refers to a different
king from the first ten.
In some
languages it may be necessary to make
this explicit. For example:
Translate it at the beginning of the
clause
after them will arise another king
(REB89)
(3) It literally means, “to arise, rise”
(RSV52, NRSV89, NJPS85, NIV84,
NIV11).
another king (NIV84,
NET08, NLT07, GNTD)
97
Translate this phrase at the end of the
clause (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
GW):
he shall be different from: See the Notes
Other ways English
at 7:19a, 7:23a.
versions translate this are:
he will be very different from …
(TEV)
-OR-
who will differ from …
In some languages it may be more
natural to translate this clause as a
separate sentence.
This one shall be different from
(NRSV89)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
This king shall be very different
from …
The text does not explain in what way
this king would be different.
he: The pronoun is a third masculine
singular referring back to the king that
appeared in 7:24b. Steinmann translates
the pronoun “it” referring to the image of
the horn rather than the king. However,
it is usually better to refer to the king in
this context.
the former ones: English versions translate
this in different ways:
the others (CEV95)
-OR-
his predecessors (REB89)
-OR-
the earlier ones (TEV, NIV84,
NIV11)
98
shall put down The Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates put down is literally “to
make low.” It has been translated in
different ways:
(1) Some versions interpret this verb to
mean “subdue or remove from
power”:
he will subdue three kings (NIV84,
NIV11)
-OR-
will overthrow three kings (TEV)
-OR-
he will take power after having
defeated three other kings 612
(2) The verb literally means, “to make
low.” It can mean to humiliate613 or
humble. This could refer to the
result of a king being overthrown
and losing his power to rule.
he will humble three kings (GW)
-OR-
-OR-
the kings who ruled before him
(NCV)
he will bring low three kings
(REB89)
-OR-
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
However, in some languages (2) may
imply the meaning in (1). Translate this
clause in a way that is natural in your
language.
who came before him (GW)
-OR-
the other ten (NLT96, NLT07)
-OR-
the previous ones (NIV84)
Translate this phrase in a way that is
natural in your language.
7:24d
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . There are
different ways to interpret this connector.
(1) The connector introduces a series of
examples of how he would be from
his predecessors:
He will lay
(Goldingay)
low
three
kings
three kings: See the Notes at 3:8a. The
three kings were three of the ten kings
that Daniel mentioned previously. 614
Other ways to translate this in English
are:
three of them (NLT96)
-OR-
the other kings
Comment on 7:24b-d: In some languages it
may be more natural to change the order of
these three verse parts. For example:
The eleventh king, different from
the preceding ones, took power by
getting rid of three of the preceding
kings. 615
-OR-
he will subdue three kings (NIV84,
NIV11)
(2) It may introduce something else that
the little horn would do.:
and (NRSV89, ESVUS16, REB89,
TEV, CEV95, NCV, NJPS85) 611
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
7:25a
The Aramaic connector begins this verse.
In this context, the connector introduces the
another example of how he would be
Consultant Notes on Daniel
different from the others. English versions
translate it in two ways:
(1) Translate a connector
and (KJV)
(2) Begin a new sentence (RSV52,
NRSV89, ESVUS16, GW, NLT96,
NLT07, NET08, REB89, TEV,
CEV95, NCV, NJPS85, NIV84,
NIV11)
Both are good options. Translate the
connection in a way that is most natural
in your language.
He shall speak words against the Most
High: In some languages it may be
redundant to say speak words (RSV52,
NRSV89, NJPS85). Other ways English
versions translate this are:
He will speak against the Most High
God (GW)
-OR-
He will defy the Most High God
-OR-
He will speak against the Supreme
God
-OR-
This king will speak evil of God
Most High (CEV95)
-OR-
he will insult the Most High God
(similarly the NJB)
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
speak words against: The Aramaic
word that the RSV52 translates speak
occurs in 7:8, 11, 20, 25. 616 In this
context, it has a negative meaning: “to
speak in a hostile way against.” 617 He
will speak bad things against God. Other
ways English versions translate this are:
defy (NLT96)
-OR-
speak against (TEV, GW)
-OR-
speak evil (CEV95)
-OR-
speak contemptuously 618
Translate this idea in a way that is natural
in your language.
99
Most High: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates Most High differs from
the word that the RSV52 translates Most
High in 7:18, 22, 25b, 28. 619 In order to
distinguish between these two words, the
Notes suggests that you add the word
“God” to the phrase here. For example:
Most High God (GW, NCV)
-OR-
God Most High
-OR-
Supreme God (TEV)
This title refers to a different person from
the one mentioned in 7:25b.
7:25b
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . English
versions interpret it in different ways:
(1) In this context, it introduces another
thing that the king will do. Most
English versions translate and (KJV,
RSV52, NLT96, NLT07, REB89,
TEV, CEV95, NCV, NJPS85,
NIV84, NIV11, NJPS85, Lucas,
Goldingay, Collins). The NET08
begins a new sentence here.
(2) Some commentators
introduces a result:
think
it
so that (Steinmann)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
shall wear out the saints of the Most
High: Other ways that English versions
translate this are:
and shall oppress those who follow
the Most High
-OR-
and he will treat cruelly the Highest
One’s people
-OR-
and torment those who follow the
Highest One
Translate this clause in a way that is most
natural in your language.
shall wear out: The Aramaic verb that
the RSV52 translates wear out can refer
to clothes that wear out. 620 However, in
Consultant Notes on Daniel
this context, the verb is used in a
figurative way. In this context, it means,
“to hurt, torment, cause to weaken.” It
implies
a
“long
drawn
out
621
persecution.”
English
versions
translate this in at least two ways:
(1) Translate the meaning of the figure
of speech. For example:
oppress (GW, TEV, NIV84, NIV11,
NLT07)
-OR-
100
•
The NASB uses “the Highest
One” here and in 7:18, 22, 27
and the Most High in 7:25a.
(2) Translate the two titles in the same
way. For example, the KJV,
RSV52,
NRSV89,
ESVUS16,
NLT96, NLT07, REB89, NJPS85,
NIV84, NET08, NJB use Most
High in both places. See also
Steinmann, Lucas, Collins.
-OR-
Some interpret this phrase as a
modifier and not a title.
he will be cruel (CEV95)
on high (Goldingay)
he will continually harass (NET)
(3)
-OR-
harass (NJPS85)
-OR-
he will hurt and kill (NCV)
-OR-
torment (NJB)
(2) Some versions translate the verb
literally (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
NLT96, REB89.
shall wear out the holy ones of the
Most High (NRSV89)
Option (1) is recommended.
saints: Translate this term in the same
way you did at 7:18a. The word holy
refers to those who are consecrated or
dedicated. In this case, they are those
who are dedicated to the Most High.
Some ways to translate this are:
those who are dedicated to …
-OR-
those who are consecrated to…
-OR-
those who belong to …
the Most High: See the Notes at 7:18a.
The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates Most High is different from the
word that the RSV52 translates Most
High in the rest of the Aramaic part of
Daniel. 622 There are different ways to
translate this phrase:
(1) Translate the two titles differently.
For example:
• The GW uses “Most High” here
and 7:18, 22, 27 but “Most
High God” in 7:25a.
Interpretation (1) is recommended. The
author seemed indicate that this person
was different in some way from the one
called “Most High” in 7:25a.
7:25c
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . English
versions translate this connector in
different ways:
(a) In this context, it introduces
something even more surprising.
Moreover (Steinmann)
(b) In this context, it
something else that
attempted to do.
and
(GW,
NIV84,
NRSV89, ESVUS16)
introduces
the king
NIV11,
(c) Begin a new sentence (NLT96,
NLT07, REB89, TEV, NET08,
CEV95, NCV, NJPS85, NJB)
Option (a) is recommended. Each of
these options are acceptable. Translate
this connection in a way that is most
natural in your language.
shall think to change the times and the
law: The Aramaic verb that the RSV52
translates think means, “to intend.” 623
Other ways that English versions
translate this are:
he will intend to change set times
and laws
Consultant Notes on Daniel
religious laws (REB89, TEV) 628
-OR-
and try to change the set times and
laws (NIV84)
(3) It refers to the Mosaic law629
-OR-
and try to change times and laws
that people have already set
(Similarly, Goldingay)
-OR-
He will plan to change the set times
and the law (Lucas)
God’s Law (CEV95)
-OR-
the Law (NJB)
(4) Some interpret this word with the
word times as communicating one
idea (hendiadys):
Translate this clause in a way that is most
natural in your language.
times: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates times refers to times
that people fixed for special occasions. 624
(1) It refers to regular times when
people did things.
appointed times (GW)
-OR-
times (NJPS85, RSV52, ESVUS16,
NET08, Steinman, Cook, Collins)
-OR-
set times (NIV84, NIV11, Lucas)
-OR-
seasons (NJB)
-OR-
calendar 625
(2) In refers to the dates of sacred
occasions or feasts. 626
sacred seasons (NRSV89, TEV)
-OR-
sacred festivals (NLT96, NLT07)
-OR-
festival seasons (REB89)
-OR-
religious festivals
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
law: The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates law can refer to different kinds
of laws. 627 Scholars have interpreted it in
different ways:
(1) It refers to law in general:
the law (RSV52, NRSV89, Lucas)
-OR-
laws (GW, NLT96, NLT07, NCV,
NJPS85, NIV84, NIV11)
-OR-
and law (Collins)
(2) It refers to religious laws:
101
times established by law (NET08)
-OR-
times set by decree (Goldingay)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. It is
best not to be too specific. 630
7:25d
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 has translated and is . In this
context, it introduces a summary result.
English versions translate it in at least
two ways.
(1) Translate
a
connector
introduces a new event.
that
and (KJV, NLT96, NLT07, REB89,
RSV52, NRSV89, ESVUS16, TEV,
NJPS85, NJB, Goldingay, Collins,
Lucas, Cook)
(2) Translate
a
connector
introduces a result:
that
So (Steinmann)
(3) Begin a new sentence (GW, NCV,
NET08, NIV84, NIV11)
Translate this connection in a way that is
natural in your language.
they shall be given into his hand: This is a
passive clause. In some languages it will
be more natural to translate this as an
active clause. For example:
and the king will have power over
those who are consecrated to the
Most High…
-OR-
and the king will do what he wants
against the people who belong to the
Most High…
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
-OR-
and the king will have authority
over the people who are consecrated
to the Most High…
Those who follow the Most High
-OR-
And the king will have control over
them…
Some commentators have wondered
whether this verb is a divine passive.
That is, they think that God delivered or
perhaps allowed the saints to come under
the power of the little horn/king. It may
be true that God allowed this to happen.
He is all powerful. However, this is not
the focus of the clause and it is best not
to make this idea explicit.
they: The pronoun they refers to the
saints in 7:25b. English versions translate
this in two ways:
(1) The third person plural pronoun
refers to the saints of the Most High
in 7:25b.
they (KJV, RSV52,
ESVUS16,
NJPS85,
NLT07, Lucas)
(2)
102
NRSV89,
NET08,
The pronoun refers to the times
in 7:25c.
they (Goldingay)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. This
pronoun has been translated in different
ways:
saints (GW, NLT96, REB89, TEV,
CEV95, NIV84, NJB).
-OR-
holy people (NIV11, GW)
-OR-
holy people who belong to God
(NCV)
-OR-
God’s people (GNTD)
However, in this context, it is best to
translate the same term you used in 7:18,
22, 25b. For example:
those who are dedicated to the Most
High
-OR-
those who are consecrated to the
Most High
-OR-
those who belong to the Most High
Translate in a way that is most natural in
your language.
in his hand: See the Notes at 2:38a.
The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates hand is used in a figurative
way. In this context, it means, “might,
power.” 631 Other ways English versions
translate this are:
into his power (NRSV89, NJPS85,
Lucas, Cook)
-OR-
under his power (TEV)
-OR-
under his authority
-OR-
into his control (Goldingay)
Translate this phrase in a way that is
most natural in your language.
for:
The connector that the RSV52
translates for means, “until” (KJV). 632
Most modern versions use a word that
refers to an extent or duration of time.
for (RSV52, NRSV89, ESVUS16,
GW, NLT96, NT07, NET08,
REB89, TEV, CEV95, NCV,
NJPS85, NIV84, NIV11, NJB)
-OR-
during 633
Translate this connector in a way that is
most natural in your language.
a time, two times, and half a time: See the
Notes at 4:16c. The Aramaic word that
the RSV52 translates time is a different
from the word used in 7:25c. The phrase
used here refers to a progression of time:
a time, two times, and a half a time.
English versions translate it in different
ways.
(1) The word time refers to a definite
but unspecified period of time. The
plural word times refers to two
periods of time. 634
a time, two times, and half a time
(RSV52, NRSV89, CEV95, NJB)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
a period, two periods, and a half of a
period (Lucas, Goldingay, BFrCL)
(2) The word time refers to a definite
but unspecified period of time. The
plural times is indefinite.
a time, times and half a time (GW,
NJPS85, NIV84, NIV11, similarly
the NLT96, NLT07, NET08,
Steinmann, Collins, Cook)
(3) The phrase refers more specifically
to three and one-half years (TEV,
NCV). 635 Those who support this
view refer to 12:11-12.
Interpretation (1) is recommended. Some
languages may not have an abstract word
for a period of time.
Comment on 7:25d: In some languages it
may be more natural to change the order of
the clauses. For example:
For three and a half periods of time
this king will have power over those
who are consecrated to the Most
High.
General Comment on the phrase a time, two
times, and half a time:
The phrase time, times, and half a time
occurs in Daniel 7:25 and 12:7. In both
contexts it is associated with the fourth
kingdom.
In Daniel 8:14; 12:11 and 12:12 the text
refers to “1,290 days” and “1,335 days”
respectively. These three references present
actual numbers. Each of these references
describe approximately a three and a half
year period. Each are associated with the
third kingdom, that is Greece. They
correspond to a time period of suffering of
the faithful Israelites during the persecution
by the Greeks in 167-164 BC.
Peter Gentry suggests that references that
have actual numbers refer to a literal period
of time while the references indicated by the
more vague expression (“times, times, and
half a time”) are symbolic. 636 He notes that
the more vague expression (“time, times,
103
and half a time”) is found in texts which
present symbolic visions while the phrase
with actual numbers are all found in the
explanation of visions.
Gentry concludes that the period of suffering
under Antiochus IV (ca. 167-164) is
typological of the “time, times, and half a
time” period which refers to a period of
suffering by God’s people during the fourth
kingdom. 637
Paragraph 7:26-27
In Daniel 7:26 the members of the heavenly
court meet and judge the king, which is
represented by the little horn. Some English
versions begin a new paragraph at this verse
(NIV84, NIV11, NLT96, NLT07, NCV,
Steinmann). Daniel 7:26-27 function as the
climax of the second half of Daniel 7. 638
7:26a
But: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates but is . English
versions translate this in different ways:
(1) It introduces the next event in the
narrative: 639
Then (NRSV89, TEV, NJPS85,
Steinmann)
(2) It introduces a contrast.
But (KJV, RSV52, ESVUS16, GW,
CEV95, NCV, NIV84, NIV11,
NET08, NJB, Lucas, Goldingay,
Cook)
-OR-
But then (NLT96, NLT07) 640
Interpretation (1) is recommended, but
both options are good.
the court shall sit in judgment: See the
Notes at 7:10d. The Aramaic clause the
RSV52 translates the court shall sit in
judgment is literally, “judgment will sit.”
There are different ways to translate this:
the members of the court will sit
down to judge
-OR-
the judges will sit in order to begin
to judge
Consultant Notes on Daniel
At that time, judges would sit down
before they declared their judgment. The
verb sit implies that the judges were
ready to pronounce an important
decision. This may not be the same
custom that is done in other cultures. As
a result, some English versions omit the
verb “to sit” (NLT96, CEV95, NCV). If
it is unnatural in your language to use the
word “sit” in this context, you may be
able to translate the same meaning in a
different way. For example:
the judges will gather together to
announce what should happen.
-OR-
the judges will meet together to
pronounce a verdict.
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
the court: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates court can have
different meanings. 641 In this context it
refers to the assembly of judges that met
in heaven where the Ancient of Days sat
on the throne. 642
English versions
translate this word differently:
(1) The word refers to a group of judges
who gathered together to make a
decision. Other ways to say this in
English are:
court (RSV52, NRSV89, GW,
NLT96, NCV, REB89, NJPS85,
NJB, NIV84)
-OR-
heavenly court (TEV)
-OR-
the members of the court
-OR-
the judges
643
(2) The word can refer to an aspect of
the procedure of judging.
judgment (KJV, GW)
-OR-
time of judgment (CEV95)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
104
7:26b
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is .
In this
context, it introduces the next event in
the narrative. English versions translate
this in in different ways:
•
Translate the connector
and (RSV52, NRSV89, ESVUS16,
NLT96, NJPS85, NIV84, NJB)
•
Begin a new sentence (NCV)
Both are good. Translate in a way that is
most natural in your language.
his dominion shall be taken away: The
RSV52 translates this as a passive clause.
The Aramaic clause is literally, “they
(indefinite) will take away his dominion”
(KJV). Other ways to say this in English
are: 644
They (indefinite) will take away his
power
-OR-
They (indefinite) will depose him
from power
-OR-
They will put an end to his
sovereignty 645
In some languages it may be necessary to
make explicit who is doing the action. In
this case, the agent may be the judges of
the court or more specifically the Ancient
of Days himself. If that is true in your
language, you may be able to say:
The heavenly court will decide to
take away his power to rule
-OR-
The judges in heaven will stop him
from ruling
-OR-
The Ancient of Days will put an end
to his authority to rule
dominion: See the Notes at 7:12a. The
singular form of this word occurs six
times in Daniel 7. 646 In this context, the
word means, “authority to rule, power.”
There are different ways to translate this
in English. For example:
authority (CEV95, Goldingay)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
ruling authority (NET08)
-OR-
power (GW,
NIV84, NIV11,
NLT96, NIV07, TEV, GW, NCV)
-OR-
sovereignty (REB89, Cook)
-OR-
domination 647
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
shall be taken away: See the Notes at
7:12a. In this context, the Aramaic word
that the RSV52 translates shall be taken
away means, “to depose, to put an end to
his rule, to oust from power.”
(1) Some versions express this by
focusing on the ruling authority
being taken away.
deprived (REB89, NJB)
-OR-
shall be taken away (RSV52,
NRSV89, ESVUS16, similarly,
NIV84, NIV11)
(2) Others focus on the person who is
removed of his position of authority.
depose
-OR-
oust
-OR-
removed (NET08)
The first interpretation is recommended.
Translate the meaning in a way that is
most natural in your language.
7:26c
to:
The Aramaic preposition that the
RSV52 translates to can have different
meanings:
(1)
It introduces a purpose:
to…
(KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, Lucas, Goldingay)
-OR-
in order to (Steinmann, Cook)
(2)
It introduces a clause that
explains what else the judges
decided. For example:
105
and (TEV, CEV95, NCV, NIV84,
NIV11, NLT07 )
(3) It introduces a result.
so that (REB89)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
be consumed and destroyed to the end:
The RSV52 translates this as a passive
clause. The Aramaic text is literally, “to
consume and destroy to the end” (KJV).
The two verbs are synonyms. The objects
of the two verbs are not explicitly stated.
The English versions interpret the object
in different ways:
(1) It refers to the king’s power to rule
(NET08,
RSV52,
NRSV89,
ESVUS16, NIV84, NIV11, NLT96,
NLT07, REB89, NJB,NJPS85). 648
to completely stop him from having
the power to rule again
-OR-
in order to completely destroy his
ability to rule forever
(2) It refers to the king (GW, TEV,
Lucas, Goldingay, Steinmann)
and destroy him completely (TEV)
(3) It refers to his kingdom (CEV95,
NCV).
and his kingdom will be completely
destroyed (NCV)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
The RSV52 translates this as a passive
clause. In some languages it may be
more natural to translate this as an active
clause.
in order to abolish all his power
-OR-
In order to completely end and
destroy any possibility for him from
have authority to rule again
consumed: The Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates consumed means, “to
annihilate.” 649 The implied object “it” is
dominion. 650 In some languages it may
not be natural to say: “consume”
authority or power. You may need to
use a different verb. For example:
Consultant Notes on Daniel
abolished (REB89, NJPS85)
-OR-
end
Translate this verb in a way that is
natural in your language.
destroyed: See the Notes at 2:24b. This
verb is a synonym with the verb “to
consume.” 651 The implied object “it” is
dominion. 652
In some languages it may be natural to
combine the two verbs together as one
phrase:
106
given to the holy ones.
The author
deliberately associates the holy ones with
the one who is like a son of man.
And:
The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is Many
versions do not translate a connector but
simply begin a new sentence at this verse
(NRSV89, GW, REB89, TEV, NJPS85,
GNTD). Other English versions interpret
this connector in different ways.
(1) The connector introduces the next
event in the narrative.
-OR-
And (KJV, RSV52, NJB, GW,
Cook)
completely end
-OR-
-OR-
Then (NLT96, NLT07, CEV95,
NCV, NIV84, NIV11, NET08, NCV
Lucas)
completely abolish
completely destroy
to the end: See the Notes at 6:26f. The
Aramaic phrase that the RSV52
translates to the end can have different
meanings.
(1) It refers to an extent of time.
for ever (REB89, NIV84, NIV11,
NJPS85, Steinmann, Lucas).
-OR-
for all time (NJPS85)
(2) It refers to a point in time
in the end to destroy and to
annihilate it
-OR-
finally destroyed and reduced to
nothing (NJB)
(3) It means, “completely, totally”
(NRSV89, GW, NLT96, TEV,
CEV95, NCV). 653
totally destroyed (NRSV89)
-OR-
destroy him completely (TEV)
-OR-
completely
and
permanently
destroyed (Goldingay)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
7:27a
This verse is similar to 7:14. In 7:14 the
Ancient of Days gave dominion to the one
like a son of man. In 7:27a dominion is
(2) The connector introduces a contrast:
but (Steinmann)
Both options are good. Translate the
connector in a way that is most natural in
your language.
the kingdom and the dominion and the
greatness of the kingdoms under the
whole heaven shall be given to the
people of the saints of the Most High:
This is a passive clause. In some
languages it may be more natural to
translate this as an active clause. It may
also be helpful to divide this clause into
several sentences. For example:
Then the Ancient of Days will
give to those who are consecrated to
the Most High the authority to rule
over all the people of the earth.
They will rule with greater power
and have more splendor than all
other kingdoms.
-OR-
Then the Ancient One will give
the people who are consecrated to
the Most High the power to rule.
They will rule over all the kingdoms
on earth with great power and glory.
kingdom: See the Notes at 2:37b; 4:3b;
7:14a. The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates kingdom can have a
Consultant Notes on Daniel
wide range of meanings. There are at
least three possible interpretations.
(1) It can refer to the abstract idea of
kingship, or sovereignty. 654
kingship (NRSV89, NJPS85, NJB,
Lucas, Cook)
-OR-
power to rule (NCV)
-OR-OR-
-OR-
-OR-
splendours (NJB)
power (TEV)
-OR-
-OR-
NIV07,
(2) It can refer to the place (realm) or
people who live in the realm that the
king rules. This is the meaning in
Daniel 2:39-40 and many other
places in Daniel. 656 For example:
(KJV, RSV52, GW,
NET08,
Steinmann,
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
dominion: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates dominion is . See
the Notes at 7:6c. It is a close synonym
to “kingdom.” It is an abstract word. It
can have different meanings depending
on the context.
(1) It means, “power, authority to rule.”
power (GW, NLT96,
NIV84, NIV11) 657
greatness of the kingdoms: See the
Notes at 5:18b. There are at least two
interpretations of the Aramaic word that
the RSV52 translates greatness. 659
grandeur (NJPS85)
kingly authority (Goldingay)
kingdom
CEV95,
Collins)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. In
some languages you may be able to use
the same word for “kingdom” and
“dominion.”
(1) It can mean importance :
kingly power (REB89)
sovereignty
(NLT96,
NIV84, NIV11) 655
107
NLT07,
glory
(2) It can refer to its large size or
importance:
greatness (Steinmann, NCV, GW,
GND, NET08, NIV84, RSv52,
NRSV89,
ESVUS16,
NIV11,
NLT07)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
under the whole heavens: This phrase
describes the word kingdoms. It refers to
all the kingdoms everywhere on the
earth. Other ways English versions say
this include:
(1) It refers kingdoms below the sky,
that is all the kingdoms on earth.
under heaven (GW, NLT96, NLT07,
REB89)
-OR-
under the whole heaven (RSV52,
NRSV89, ESVUS16)
-OR-
power to rule (NCV)
under all of heaven (NET08, Lucas,
Steinmann)
-OR-
-OR-
sovereignty (REB89)
-OR-
under
the
(Goldingay)
authority (NET08)
-OR-
-OR-
(2) It means, “to rule.” 658
rule (NJB)
(3) It may be ambiguous. It could mean
“rule” or “realm.”
dominion (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, NJPS85, Collins, Lucas,
Steinmann)
whole
heavens
on earth (TEV)
(2) It refers to kingdoms everywhere
below where God lives.
under Heaven (NJPS85)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
shall be given: The Aramaic verb that
the RSV52 translates was given can have
Consultant Notes on Daniel
different meanings depending on the
context. 660 Use a verb that is natural in
your language for each of the objects of
the verb. In some languages you may
need two or three different verbs. See
the Notes on the clause above.
The text does not explicitly state who
this person was who gave the saints
authority to rule. There are different
possibilities.
(1) It refers to the Ancient of Days
(Most High God). See the Notes at
7:25a.
(2) It refers to the Most High” (one like
a son of man).
Daniel 7:13-14
implies that the Ancient of Days
gave the one like a son of man
authority to rule. See also the Notes
on Daniel 7:25a,b, which imply that
this title may refer to a supernatural
being who is different from God.
Interpretation (1) is recommended. The
Ancient of Days gave authority to his
people so that they could rule.
108
people (RSV52, KJV, NRSV89,
GW, NLT96, REB89, NET08,
NIV84, NJPS85, GNTD).
Both options are acceptable. There is
actually little difference between these
two interpretations if you translate the
word “saints” by the word “people” or
“people who follow God.” See the note
below.
people of the saints: The same
phrase occurs in 8:24. This phrase has
been interpreted in at least two ways:
(1) The two words refer to the same
thing. 663 The phrase refers to people
who are consecrated to the Most
High. You can translate this:
the people, the saints…(Steinmann)
-OR-
the saints, the people of the Most
High (NIV84)
-OR-
a holy people…(Goldingay)
-OR-
people who follow …
-OR-
people who are consecrated to…
to the people of the saints of the Most
High: This is an awkward phrase in
Aramaic. There is also a textual problem.
Some ancient versions do not have the
word people.
(2) The phrase refers to people who are
protected
by
angels.
(See
interpretation (2) on saints)
(1) Omit the phrase the people. The
Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates the people is absent in
Theodotion, the Latin Vulgate and
the Syriac Pehitta. This is the harder
and preferred text. 661 It is awkward
and not found anywhere else in the
Bible.
(3) The phrase is possessive. 664
omit the word people (CEV95)
(2) Translate the word people. The
Aramaic word is in the Masoretic
Text, as well as 4Q Daniela, 4Q
Danielb and the Old Greek.
However, the word people looks
like an insertion to avoid connecting
the pronoun in v. 27 with the Most
High instead of with the saints. 662
the people whom angels protect
the people who belong to the holy
ones
-OR-
the people of the holy ones (NET08)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. Since
the saints are people, you may be able to
combine both words into one phrase. For
example:
the holy people (GW, NLT96,
NLT07, NIV11, REB89, NCV) 665
-OR-
people (TEV)
saints: See the Notes at 7:18a.
The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates saints comes from the word
that means “holy.” Scholars have
interpreted it in at least two ways.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
(1) The word holy refers that which is
consecrated or dedicated for a
particular use. 666 In this context, it
refers more generally to those who
are consecrated to the Most High. 667
(2) It refers to the people of Israel. 668
(3) It refers to angels (4:17). 669
(4)
back to “Most High” or “people.” 673
English versions interpret this clause in
two ways:
(1) The pronoun refers to the Most High
(NASB, KJV, ESVUS16, NET08,
CEV95, NIV84, NIV11, NJB,
NET08, NLT07, Steinmann).
His kingdom
(CEV95)
It refers to both humans and
angels. 670
will
be
eternal
-OR-
His kingdom will be an everlasting
kingdom (NIV84)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Translate it in the same way you did in
7:18a
the Most High: This title is different
from the one in 7:25a. 671 See the Notes
at 7:18a. The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates Most High comes from
the Hebrew word for “highest” with an
Aramaic plural ending. Translate this
title in the same way you did in 7:18a but
different from the title in 7:25a. 672 The
Most High refers to the one like a son of
man.
109
-OR-
His kingdom will last forever
(NLT07)
-OR-
He will have authority to rule for
ever.
(2) The pronoun refers to the saints
(RSV52,
NRSV89,
NJPS85,
NLT96, REB89, TEV). 674 Although
people in Aramaic is grammatically
singular, it is plural in sense. As a
result, some versions translate a
plural here to refer back to people.
7:27b
They will rule forever (NLT96)
In 7:27b the text tells something new about
the dominion. It will last forever. The
Aramaic text does not use a connector to
introduce this verse part. English versions
begin this clause in different ways.
-OR-
Their kingly power will last for ever
(REB89)
-OR-
Their royal power will never end
(TEV)
•
Begin a new sentence at this verse
(GW,
CEV95,
TEV, NLT96,
NLT07, GW, NLT96, REB89,
NJPS85, NIV84, NIV11, NET08)
Interpretation one is recommended. The
pronoun is singular and likely refers to an
individual. The nearest referent is the
Most High. 675
•
Join this clause to the previous one
by a comma (KJV, NJB)
•
Use a semicolon (RSV52, NRSV89,
kingdom: See the Notes at 7:27a. This
Aramaic word can have several
meanings. In this context, kingdom
refers to the authority or power to rule.
The Most High will rule forever.
In some languages it may be more natural to
translate a connector here. Translate the
beginning of this clause in a way that is
most natural in your language.
their kingdom shall be an everlasting
kingdom: See the Notes at 7:14c, 27a.
The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates their is really a third person
masculine singular “his.” It can refer
7:27c
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . In this
context, it introduces a second
characteristic of the Most High. English
versions introduce this clause in different
ways:
Consultant Notes on Daniel
•
Translate a connector
and ESVUS16, (NLT96, REB89,
TEV, CEV95, NJPS85, NLT07,
NIV84, NIV11, KJV, RSV52,
NRSV89)
•
Begin a new sentence (GW, NCV)
Translate this connection in a way that is
most natural in your language.
all dominions shall serve: The Aramaic
word that the RSV52 translates
dominions is . It occurs seven
times in Daniel 7. Elsewhere in Daniel it
occurs in the singular. Only here is it
found in the plural. It has been
interpreted in different ways:
(1) The plural form refers to spiritual
powers who exercise dominion and
power over the world. 676
all spiritual powers
-OR-
all heavenly rulers
-OR-
all other powers (GW)
(2) It refers to human rulers.
all rulers (NIV84, NIV11, NLT07,
GNTD)
-OR-
all authorities (NET08)
(3) Some versions interpret the plural
form as referring to the other
kingdoms on earth.
Every realm will worship…
-OR-
all dominions (Lucas, Steinmann)
-OR-
all the dominions (Collins)
(4) It refers to
kingdoms.
people
from
all
People from all other kingdoms
(NCV)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
Comment on Daniel 7:27
The apocalyptic genre presents events in
a symbolic way. It explains events and
110
the meaning behind the events. The four
beasts are complex symbols. On the one
hand, they symbolize four kingdoms.
At the same time they represent the kings
that rule each earthly kingdom. (7:17,
23). Finally the beasts also symbolizes
the angelic authority or spiritual powers
behind each kingdom (Daniel 10:12, 13,
and 20). So each beast refers to a
kingdom, an earthly king and the
spiritual power that lies behind that
kingdom. Finally, the king stands as the
collective representative of the people of
his kingdom.
This same is true of the son of man in
Daniel 7. The Ancient of Days gives the
one like a son of man dominion, power
and a kingdom. He is one like a son of
man (human) yet he also comes with the
clouds of heaven (divine). He is the
heavenly power behind the kingdom as
well as the earthy king that rules over it.
Finally he is the corporate representative
of his people, who suffer persecution
from the fourth beast. 677 We can say “the
son of man refers to a heavenly power,
an earthly king, as well as the earthly
kingdom.” 678
The one like a son of man and his people
are closely identified. 679 However, the
one like a son of man is depicted as an
individual, and not simply a symbol for
the people of God. 680 The destinies of
the Son of Man and the people of God
are linked. 681 This helps to explain the
divine figure that is associated with the
saints in 7:27 (the Most High) who is
associated with the saints and yet
distinguished from Yahweh in some
way. 682 This explains the pronominal
reference to him as the object of worship
by all powers.
His is the eternal
kingdom.
dominions: See the Notes at 7:6c. The
Aramaic word that the RSV52 translates
dominion is a synonym of the word
“kingdom.”
It can have different
meanings, depending on the context.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
him (NIV84, NIV11, NLT07,
NASB, CEV95, KJV, NET08,
CEVUS06, Steinmann, Hamilton,
Gentry).
(1) It refers to the people who live in
the different realms of the world.
every realm (REB89)
-OR-
people from all the other kingdoms
(NCV)
(2) This pronoun refers to the “saints of
the Most High.”
(2) It refers to rulers.
all other rulers (NLT96, similarly
the TEV, NIV84)
them (RSV52, NRSV89, GW, NCV,
GNTD, Cook)
(3) The pronoun refers to the kingdom.
-OR-
it (Collins, Lucas, Goldingay)
all authorities
(3) It refers to power, authority to rule.
111
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
all other powers (GW)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
serve: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates serve is . See the
Notes on the verb serve 7:14b. 683
English versions translate this in different
ways:
(1) It means, “to worship a divinity”
(Gentry, Hamilton) 684
Worship … him (NIV84, NIV11,
Steinmann)
(2) It means, “to serve.”
serve (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
ESVUS16, NJPS85,
REB89,
NLT96, NLT07, GW, TEV, CEV95,
Lucas, Collins) 685
-OR-
would submit to him 686
(3) It means, “to show respect.”
respect (NCV)
-OR-
honor (Goldingay)
Interpretation (1) is recommended. 687
Some languages may have more than one
word that means, “to worship.” Use a
word that most naturally communicates
the idea of worshipping God.
and obey them: The Aramaic word that the
RSV52 translates them is literally “him.”
English versions interpret it in different
ways.
(1) The pronoun refers to the Most High
Conclusion 7:28
Paragraph 7:28
This verse functions as a conclusion to the
chapter. Most English versions begin a new
paragraph at this verse (NRSV89,
ESVUS16, NCV, NIV84, NIV11, CEV95,
GW, NLT96, NLT07, REB89, TEV).
7:28
Here is the end of the matter: The
Aramaic word that the RSV52 translates
matter can have different meanings. In
this context, it indicates the end of the
report that Daniel gave about the
dream. 688 English versions translate it in
different ways;
(1) It refers in a general way to the end
of something:
This is the conclusion of the matter
(NET08)
-OR-
This is the end of the matter
(NIV84,
NIV11,
similarly
ESVUS16, GW, Steinmann)
-OR-
Here the account ends (NRSV89,
NJPS85)
-OR-
This is the end of the account (TEV,
similarly Lucas, Goldingay)
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
(2) It refers to end of the vision. For
example:
I, Daniel, was very afraid (NCV)
-OR-
That was the end of the vision
(NLT96, NLT07)
-OR-
That was the end of the dream
(NCV)
-OR-
That is what I saw and heard
(CEV95)
Both options are good. Translate this in
a way that is most natural in your
language.
I was absolutely terrified by what I
saw in my dream
alarmed me: See the Notes at 5:6b,
7:15b.
The Aramaic verb that the
RSV52 translates alarm means, “to
frighten someone, to terrify someone.” 690
English verses translate this in different
ways:
was very afraid (NCV)
-OR-
was deeply troubled (NIV84)
“Here is: The Aramaic phrase that the
RSV52 translates here is literally “as far
as here.” 689 This phrase signals the end
of the vision. English versions translate it
in different ways.
Here is ..(GW, KJV, RSV52)
-OR-
That was… (NLT96, CEV95, NCV)
-OR-
This is …(TEV)
Translate this phrase in a way that is
most natural in your language for ending
an account.
As for me, Daniel: The Aramaic phrase
that the RSV52 translates As for me,
Daniel is literally, “I, Daniel.” Emphasis
is placed on the pronoun I. Daniel
described how he personally reacted to
what he saw and heard.
English
versions translate this in different ways.
I, Daniel (GW, ESVUS16, NLT96,
NLT07, NCV, NJPS85, NIV84,
NIV11, NJB)
-OR-
I (TEV, CEV95)
Translate this emphasis in a way that is
natural in your language.
my thoughts greatly alarmed me: See the
Notes at 5:6b. The Aramaic word that
the RSV52 translates thoughts is an
abstract word. If you do not have an
abstract word like this, you may begin
the clause with a first person pronoun.
For example:
I was so frightened (TEV)
112
-OR-
was greatly disturbed (NJB)
-OR-
tormented me 691
-OR-
was terrified (NLT07)
and: The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates and is . Scholars
interpret it in at least two ways:
(1) It introduces the next thing that
happened to Daniel.
and (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89, GW,
NLT96, NLT07, REB89, NJPS85,
NIV84, NIV11, NJB)
(2) It introduces the result of the
previous clause.
that (TEV) 692
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
my color changed: See the Notes at 2:31c;
4:36c; 5:6a. 693 The Aramaic word that
the RSV52 translates color literally
means, “radiance, brightness.” Here it
refers to the appearance of Daniel’s face
(ESVUS16, NIV84, NIV11, NJPS85,
NLT96, NLT07, NRSV89, CEV95,
NCV, similarly the GW, REB89, TEV).
Try to describe the way a person’s face
changes when they become afraid. In
some languages you may have to add
implied information. For example:
•
You may be able to say that his face
changed color.
Then my face changed color
Consultant Notes on Daniel
-OR-
my color changed (NET08)
•
You may be able to describe how his
face changed. (See the next Note).
My face turned pale (NRSV89,
NIV84, NIV11, similarly the NJB,
NLT96)
-OR
my face became white with fear
(NCV)
•
You may be able to explain why his
face changed color.
He was so frightened that his
faced changed color
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language.
changed: In some languages it may be
necessary to describe how Daniel’s face
changed. 694 Most English versions
describe the color of his face. 695
darkened (NJPS85)
113
I kept the matter in my mind: English
versions interpret this clause in different
ways.
(1) Daniel did not tell anyone (GW,
NLT96, REB89, TEV, CEV95,
NCV, NIV84, NJB).
I kept this to myself (GW)
-OR-
I kept these things to myself
(NLT07)
-OR-
I kept everything to myself (NCV,
GNTD)
-OR-
I kept the matter to myself (NIV84,
NIV11, NET08, Steinmann, Lucas,
similarly Goldingay)
(2) Daniel kept thinking about what he
saw in the vision (NJPS85,
NRSV89). 698 He did not forget it.
I kept the matter in my mind
(NRSV89)
-OR-
-OR-
I did not cease thinking about it. 699
turned pale (NIV84, NIV11, NJB,
NRSV89, GW, NLT96, REB89,
TEV, CEV95)
-OR-
-OR-
turned white (NCV)
Different cultures may describe these
visible changes in different ways.
Translate meaning in a way that most
naturally describes in your language the
change that happens to someone’s face
when they become afraid.
but:
The Aramaic connector that the
RSV52 translates but is . English
versions interpret it in different ways:
(1) It introduces the next event in the
narrative:
and (TEV, CEV95, NJPS85) 696
(2) It introduces a contrast.
but (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
NLT96, REB89, NCV, NIV84,
NJB) 697
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
I did not forget these things.
In this case, both options were probably
true. Daniel kept thinking about the
vision and its meaning, and at the same
time, did not tell anyone else.
mind: See the Notes at 2:30c. The
Aramaic word that the RSV52 translates
mind is literally, “heart.” In the Aramaic
language and culture people considered
the heart as the place in the body where
people think, decide and have feelings.
(1) Some versions translate “to myself”
(GW, NLT96, REV, TEV, CEV95,
NCV, NIV84, NJB).
(2) Some English versions translate
mind (RSV52, NRSV89, NJPS85)
Interpretation (1) is recommended.
Translate this idea in a way that is most
natural in your language. Some
languages may not have an abstract word
that means, “mind.” If that is true in
your language, you may have to use a
Consultant Notes on Daniel
verb like “think, remember.” See the
examples in the Note above.
1
Goldingay, Daniel, 139, 159. This year would be
important because it was during that year that Cyrus
defeated the king of Media. Steinmann (Daniel, 330)
says that Nabonidus reigned between 556 to 539 and
that his son was installed as coregent in 553 or more
probably 550 B.C. Scholars differ as to the exact date.
Baldwin suggests that the first year of Belshazzar’s
coregency was 552-551 B.C. Miller (Daniel, 195)
suggests the date 553 B.C. .
2
Steinmann, Daniel, 330.
3
Tremper Longman III, Daniel:
The NIV84
Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
1999), 178.
4
Some scholars call it apocalyptic, others call preapocalyptic. Still others call it Biblical apocalyptic.
John Collins (cited in Frederick J. Murphy,
Apocalypticism in the Bible and Its World: A
Comprehensive
Introduction
(Grand
Rapids,
Michigan, Baker, 2012), 8) defines apocalypse as
follows: “They (both types of apocalypses – historical
and cosmological) are presented as supernatural
revelations, mediated by an angel or some heavenly
being, and they invariably focus on the final end of
life and history. This final end usually entails the
transformation of this world (the new creation of the
book of Revelation)_ but it also involves the judgment
of the individual dead and their assignment to eternal
bliss or damnation.” He distinguishes prophecy and
apocalyptic writings in Israel in that while both were
concerned with eschatology, the prophets expected
future was this-worldly, whereas, for apocalypses,
there was an element of postmortem rewards and
punishments. Both Collins and Murphy (and many
modern scholars) believe
pseudonymity is
a
characteristic of apocalyptic writing, and of Daniel in
particular. They both consider Daniel was written
around 165 BC. As a result, some conservative
scholars do not consider Daniel as apocalyptic if these
presuppositions are included in the definition. More
conservative evangelical scholars would defend the
historical authenticity of Daniel as the author of the
book of Daniel and at the same time defend the early
date of the book.
Apocalyptic literature refers to ancient literature
that had a distinct style of writing. This type of
writing was common in the intertestamental period
and at the time that Jesus lived. Arnold and Beyer
consider Apocalyptic literature as having the
following characteristics: (Bill T. Arnold and Bryan E.
Beyer, Encountering the Old Testament (Grand
Rapids, Mi.: Baker, l998),
a, It always contains some type of vision.
b. The initial revelation is usually symbolic and
mysterious and requires that someone interpret it.
114
c.
The name of the author is usually a
pseudonym or pen name.
d. Many of these books claim that their author is
a famous Old Testament person who lived centuries
before the books were actually written.
e. Apocalyptic literature describes what will
happen in the future, in particular, a future judgment at
the end of time.
f. They usually divide history in different distinct
periods of time.
g. Apocalyptic literature often distinguishes
between a spiritual world and the physical world.
Sometimes angels and demons represent the
supernatural world. At other times the person who
receives the vision is taken on a journey to another
world.
h. Many times the writer of apocalyptic literature
would describe a well-known event as if it was still in
the future. This was to make the readers believe that it
was a prophecy and therefore encourage readers to
accept the book as being important and having
authority.
The Old Testament has passages that have some
of these characteristics of apocalyptic literature (Joel
3; Isaiah 24-27; and parts of Ezekiel and Zechariah.).
While similar in some ways to apocalyptic
literature, Daniel is different in significant ways.
Arnold prefers to call Daniel, as well as Revelation, as
“biblical apocalyptic” (p. 428).
Arnold (p. 429) considers Daniel unique from
other prophetic books in that it views the future from a
more universal perspective.
As mentioned in the previous note, sometimes
scholars define “apocalyptic” genre as being
pseudonymous. However, that is not the definition
used here. The Consultant Notes takes the view that
the book of Daniel was written by Daniel himself and
that Daniel was a real person in the sixth century BC.
5
Daniel 2:28-30, 45. Peter Gentry (How to Read and
Understand the Biblical Prophets (Wheaton, IL:
Crossway, 2017), 98, n. 2 cites G.K. Beale, The Book
of Revelation, NIGTC (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
l999), 50.
6
Peter Gentry, How to Read and Understand the
Biblical Prophets, 99 notes that he has depended on
the work of N.T. Wright, The New Testament and the
People of God, vol. 1, Christian Origins and the
Question of God (Minneapolis: Fortress, l992) for
these points.
7
Longman, Daniel, 180.
8
Frederick J. Murphy (Apocalypticism in the Bible
and Its World: A Comprehensive Introduction, 14)
lists the following elements of an Apocalyptic
Worldview:
1. An unseen world affects or even determines
this one.
2. The unseen world is accessible only through
revelation.
3. After death, humans are judged, rewarded
or punished. There is often a future world
Consultant Notes on Daniel
that entails a renewal of the present one or
its replacement with a better one.
4. God’s sovereignty is an issue. Humans and/
or angels have rebelled against God’s rule,
but divine rule will soon be reasserted
Resistance to the coming of God’s rule is
common. God sometimes accomplishes the
reestablishment of divine rule alone,
sometimes with angelic aid, and sometimes
with human aid. God’s sovereignty is
contrary to earth’s kingdoms, especially
those that oppress Israel or Christians.
5. Dualism pervades apocalypses – humanity is
divided into the righteous and the
unrighteous; time is divided into the present
world and the one to come; cosmic powers
are seen to be either for or against God.
6. There is dissatisfaction with the present
world.
7. The coming of the eschaton is often
accompanied by cosmic disturbances, as
well as by social upheaval.
8. The coming of a messiah is not present in
every apocalypse but is not uncommon.
9. The apocalyptic worldview is deterministic.
At least on the macro level, things happen
according to God’s plans, regardless of
human action. Individuals and groups can
affect their own fate by aligning with or
against God.
10. The apocalyptic worldview has a developed
angelology and demonology.
11. Apocalyptic
language
is
used
to
communicate the apocalyptic worldview.
9
See Gentry (KTC, 1 edition, 532-33; KTC, 2d
edition, 602.). Gentry notes that his structure is
partially influenced by the analyses of Daniel Block,
Andrew Steinmann and James Hamilton. Andrew
Steinmann presents the following structural outline
(Daniel, 22). It too presents two interlocking chiasms,
the first an Aramaic chiasm interlocked with an
Hebrew introduction and the second a Hebrew chiasm
introduced by an Aramaic introduction.
Introduction 1: Prologue (1:1-21)
A. Nebuchadnezzar dreams of four kingdoms and the
kingdom of God (2:1-49)
B. Nebuchadnezzar sees God’s servants
rescued (3:1-30)
C. Nebuchadnezzar is judged
C’ Belshazzar is judge (5:1-31)
B’ Darius sees Daniel rescued (6:1-28)
A’ Introduction 2: Daniel has a vision of our
kingdoms and the kingdom of God (7:1-27)
D Details on the post-Babylonian kingdoms
(8:1-27)
E Jerusalem restored (9:1-27)
D’ More details on the post-Babylonian
kingdoms (10:1-12:13)
115
Hamilton (With the Clouds of Heaven, 83) suggests
the following whole book chiasm.
1. Exile to the unclean realm of the dead
2. Four kingdoms followed by the kingdom of
God
3. Deliverance of the trusting from the fiery
furnace
4. Humbling
of
proud
King
Nebuchadnezzar
5. Humbling of proud King Belshazzar
6. Deliverance of the trusting from the
lion\s den
7-9 Four kingdoms followed by the kingdom of
God
10-12 Return from exile and resurrection from the
dead
James Bejon (Daniel’s Literary Structure, 16)
2010
at
extracted
on
January
9th,
https://www.academia.edu/7163944/Commentary_On
_Daniel_Introduction)
See a double chiastic structure:
1:1 A: The prologue
2:1 >>B: A vision
3:1 >>>>C: A period of striving
4:1 >>>>>>D The might rise and fall
(*) >>>>>>>>>E: The mighty rise and fall
5:1 >>>>>>D’ The mighty rise and fall (Belshazzar)
5:31 >>>C’ A second period of striving
7:1 >>B’ A second vision
8:1 >>B: A third vision
9:1 >>>>C: third period of striving
9:24>>>>>D The mighty rise and fall
9:26a >>>>>>E: The mighty rise ad fall
10:1 >>>C’ A fourth period of striving
11:2 >B A fourth vision
12:8 A’ The Conclusion
10
See Steinmann, Daniel, 327-28.
11
Ibid., 328-29.
12
Ibid., 329.
13
Peter Gentry, KTC, 2d edition, 603.
14
Peter Gentry, KTC, 2d edition, 605, n. 11.
15
Peter Gentry, KTC, 2d edition, 603-606.
16
See H. H. Rowley, Darius the Mede and the Four
World Empires in the Book of Daniel (Cardiff:
University of Wales, l959).
17
The first beast was like a lion with eagle’s wings.
The prophet Jeremiah (49:19-22) also compared
Nebuchadnezzar to a lion and an eagle. Later in the
vision, someone plucked the eagle’s wings and made
it stand on two feet like a man and gave it the heart of
a man. This seems to describe what happened in
Daniel 4.
In that chapter
God took away
Nebuchadnezzar’s glory and his power to rule because
of his pride. Later Nebuchadnezzar repented and God
restored his kingdom to him. See Baldwin, Daniel,
139.
18
This beast was the counterpart to the beast and arms
of silver in the image of Daniel 2.
19
See E.J. Young, The Prophecy of Daniel (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), 275-94; Baldwin, Daniel,
Consultant Notes on Daniel
147. Medo-Persia replaced Babylon as the great
world power in 539 A.D. Following this view, the
three ribs refer to Lydia, Babylon, and Egypt.
20
Some scholars, however, believe that the second
beast represented the kingdom of the Medes. See
J.M. Gurney, God in Control: An Exposition of the
Prophecies of Daniel (Worthing: Walter, 1980); “The
four Kingdoms of Daniel 2 and 7,” Themelios 2
(1977): 39-45; and the discussion of this view by J. H.
Walton, “The Four Kingdoms of Daniel,” JETS 29
(1986): 25-36. Based on Jeremiah 51:27-29, Gurney
interprets the three ribs as Ararat, Minni and Ashkenaz
(See Gurney, “The four Kingdoms of Daniel 2 and 7,”
43). Walton (“The Four Kingdoms of Daniel,” 30)
suggests that that these three ribs represent Urartu,
Mannaea, and the Scythians. This view would assume
that the rise of the Median empire occurred after the
death of Nebuchadnezzar but before the fall of
Babylon.
21
In contrast with the first two views, Longman
(Daniel, 82) thinks that Daniel did not mean to
identify particular kingdoms, but intended to present a
more general picture.
22
This beast was the counterpart of the belly and
thighs of the image in Daniel 2. Scholars differ in the
way they interpret the four heads.
Gurney,
(“kingdoms,” 43-44) thinks the four heads relate to
four kings of Persia. Others think it refers to the four
generals who divided Alexander the Great’s kingdom
after his death.
23
Baldwin, Daniel, 147. Following this view, the
four heads would represent the four generals who
divided the empire after Alexander’s death.
24
J.M. Gurney, “The four Kingdoms of Daniel 2 and
7,” Themelios 2 (1977): 39-45.
See also the
discussion by J. H. Walton, “The Four Kingdoms of
Daniel,” JETS 29 (1986): 25-36. Following this
view, the four heads could be the four points of the
compass or four rulers of Persia.
However,
proponents differ as to the specifics. Gurney believes
that the second and third beasts are symbols that
represent well the differences between the Persian and
Median empires. Cyrus’s armies quickly dominated
the then known world compared to the slower and
smaller kingdom of Media.
25
See Tremper Longman, Daniel, 192.
26
This has been the traditional interpretation of Daniel
7 in early Jewish and Christian writings. See the
discussion in John H. Walton (“The Four Kingdoms of
Daniel, JETS 29.1 (l986): 25-36). Walton cites E.J.
Young who gives two main reasons why the Roman
view was accepted in the New Testament period.
First, Jesus identified himself as the Son of Man. He
also connected the “abomination of desolation” with
the future destruction of the temple (Matthew 24).
Second, Paul used the language of Daniel 7 to describe
the Antichrist. The book of Revelation also used the
symbolism of Daniel 7 to refer powers that existed in
the future.
Following this view, some have suggested that the ten
horns are ten kingdoms that come from the Roman
116
empire. The little horn is identified with the Antichrist
would lead a rebellion against God. However God
would defeat him in a final cosmic battle.
One major problem with this view is that the Roman
Empire has ended. This has caused some proponents
of this view to suggest that it refers to a “revived
Roman empire.” Others have suggested that the
Roman empire has continued in different forms.
Walton (p. 21) raises two other questions against this
view. First, the one like a son of man receives the
kingdom after the fourth kingdom. However, neither
the first or second coming of Christ immediately
follows the Roman empire. Second, the symbolism
that Paul and John use from Daniel does not clearly
identify the four empires. For example, Revelation 13
describes only one beast, not four. Scholars who hold
the Roman Empire view answer these questions in
different ways.
27
Following this view, the ten horns are the kings that
followed Alexander the Great and the small horn is
Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who oppressed the Jewish
people during the second century B.C. In contrast,
Walton (p. 32) suggests that the ten horns could refer
to ten independent states that together made up
Alexander’s empire. Gurney supports his view with
the following arguments: (1) Alexander’s army was
undefeated, but the Roman army was stopped by
Parthia. (2) The Greek civilization was very different
from the previous empires, (3) The Greek empire
conquered the other three, but Babylon, Media and
Persia were located outside the Roman Empire.
There are a number of problems with this view. One
is that when Antiochus died the kingdom of God did
not begin.
28
James Bejon, Chapter 7, 56
(Unpublished
document) extracted on January 9th, 2010 at
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_).
29
Daniel wrote Daniel 2:4-7:28 in the Aramaic
language.
30
A number of commentators divide the account into
the same larger units. See Collins, Daniel, 277; Lucas
Daniel, 164.
31
Goldingay (Daniel, 153) suggests a chiastic
structure of this section:
2b-3 four creatures appear
4-6 the first three creatures
7 the fourth creature with its ten horns
8 a small horn on the fourth
9-10 a throne scene
11a the small horn
11b the fourth creature
12 the first three creatures
13-14 a manlike figure appears
James Bejon (Daniel Chapter 7, 21) sees a double
chiastic structure for the chapter:
7:1 A: Belshazzar is crowned as Babylon’s viceregent
Consultant Notes on Daniel
7:3
B: Four beasts emerge in the earth from a
tumultuous sea
7:4
C: The first three beasts acquire dominon
over Judah
7:7
D: The unearthly fourth beast emerges
7:9
E: The Ancient of Days announces
the fourth beast’s judgment
7:11
D’ The fourth beast is judged
7:12
C’ The first three beasts are tamed
7:13
B’: The Son of Man emerges n heaven from
the earth
7:14 A’ The Son of Man is crowned as the earth’s
vice-regent
32
Some versions give a division heading for Daniel
7:1-12:13. The TEV has: “Daniel Describes His
Visions.”
33
Baldwin, Daniel, 141.
34
Longman, Daniel, 181.
35
Longman, Daniel, 186.
36
Ibid., 186.
37
Baldwin, Daniel, 141; Longman, Daniel, 186. .
38
Peter Gentry, How to Read and Understand the
Biblical Prophets, 114.
39
Longman, Daniel, 186.
40
Peter Gentry, How to Read and Understand the
Biblical Prophets, 114.
41
Ibid., 112.
42
I am indebted to Peter Gentry, How to Read and
Understand the Biblical Prophets, 109 and Stephen
Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty, 216-17 for this
insight.
43
Peter Gentry, How to Read and Understand the
Biblical Prophets, 110-111.
44
Andrew
M.
Fountain,
http://loveintruth.com/revelation/course
accessed
November 26, 2019.
45
Peter Gentry, How to Read and Understand the
Biblical Prophets (Wheaton, ILL: Crossway, 2017),
131.
46
A similar phrase introduces Nebuchadnezzar’s
dream in Daniel 2.
47
Baldwin (Daniel, 138) suggests that the first year of
Belshazzar’s coregency was 552-551 B.C. Steinmann
(Daniel, 337) that the commonly accepted date for the
beginning of Belshazzar’s coregency is 553 B.C.
although there is good evidence that it began in 550
B.C.
48
Belshazzar was the oldest son of King Nabonidus
(556-539 B.C). Nabonidus was absent from Babylon
during the last ten years of his reign. During that time,
Belshazzar acted as king in his place (549-539 B.C.).
49
Steinmann (Daniel, 266) says that “Belshazzar”
derives from the Akkadian Bēl-shar-uṣur,” Bel protect
the king” (HALOT).
50
Steinmann (Daniel, 267) suggests that Daniel may
have originally had the same pagan name Belshazzar,
but he deliberately corrupted its spelling to
“Belteshazzar” when he used this name to refer to
himself.
117
51
Lucas (Daniel, 160) interprets this as a waw
explicativum as in 6:28 (29).
52
The NET08 has “a dream filled with visions.”
53
In English, a dream is something a person sees
while they are asleep. A “vision” is also something a
person sees but not by normal sight. A vision can
occur while a person is in a trance. In Daniel the two
words were often used interchangeably.
54
The LXX has one word “vision” for the words
“dream and visions” in Aramaic. Lucas (Daniel, 177)
notes that in contrast to Nebuchadnezzar’s dream,
Daniel “participates” in his vision. The word “vision”
is also used in the 8:1; 10:1.
55
The LXX has the singular “vision.”
56
BFrCL88.
57
John A. Cook, Aramaic and Ezra Daniel: A
Handbook on the Aramaic Text (Waco, TX: Baylor
University Press, 279.
58
Lucien lacks the phrase “and he said.” Old Greek,
has:”he wrote the vision that he saw in summary
form.” It is double translated in the Vulgate. See
Goldingay, Daniel, 144; Lucas, Daniel, 158.
59
The clause is missing in Theodotion.
60
The whole clause is missing in Theodotion. Collins
(Daniel, 294) thinks this was a gloss that was
inserted into the text to correspond with the phrase
“end of the account” in 7:28.
61
Similarly Goldingay, Daniel, 142.
62
Some versions translate the connector “and” but the
clause points ahead to 7:2a. See the TEV, NLT96.
The TEV has: “and this is the record…” The NLT96
has: “He wrote the dream down, and this is what he
saw.”
63
Goldingay, Daniel, 144; It is omitted in the LXX.
64
There is a textual problem. The phrase is missing in
Theodotion. The Old Greek interprets the first word
to mean “a summary.” Lucian has “beginning.”
65
HALOT, 1975. The word is omitted in Theodotion
and the TOB.
66
BFrCL88; La Nouvelle Version Segond; La Bible du
Semeur.
67
HALOT, 1915.
68
GeCL97.
69
See John Cook, Aramaic Ezra and Daniel, 10-12.
Cook analyzes the function of the participle in BA in
narrative speech frames, particularly in the
coordinated participle construction ﬠָנֵ ֤ה … וְ אָ ֔ ַמר.
(Daniel 2:5, 8, 15, 20, 26-27, 47; 3:14,19, 24-26, 28;
4:16 [2x], 27; 5:7, 13, 17; 6:13, 17, 21; 7:2).
According to Cook, this pattern is unique to Daniel
and contrasts with other patterns such as the speech
framing with these verbs in the perfect (5:10) and
speech framing where ענהis in the perfect and אָ ֔ ַמרis
a participle (2:7, 10; 3:9, 16; 6:14). Cook explains
that while ענהis pragmatically significant in Biblical
Hebrew in multiple-verb speech frames either
signaling the most salient response in a dialogue or a
dispreferred
response,
it
has
become
a
conventionalized form in Daniel. In fact, it is instead
the pattern perfect followed by participle which is
Consultant Notes on Daniel
pragmatically significant and which marks the salient
and dispreferred response.
Cook adds that in multiple verb speech frames, the
word order is significant because the subject phrase
appears between the two participles when it is overt.
As a result, the verb waw in וְ אמרshould be
considered as a phrase boundary marker and that ענה
is a scene-setting topicalized constituent. Cook
explains that it like a topicalized gerund in English;
e.g. Going to the opera, we had great fun. In this case,
“answering, Daniel said.
70
The Old Greek and Vulgate lack the whole phrase.
Theodotion has “I, Daniel.”
71
The phrase is a combination of the Peal participle
and the Peal perfect first person .
72
Cook, Aramaic Ezra and Daniel, 280.
73
This phrase and the next one are missing in
Theodotion. Collins does not translate it (Daniel,
274). However it is in the MT, the OG and attested in
4QDanb. Lucas (Daniel, 160, n. 2) explains that the
phrase is typical of Aramaic and its repetitiveness is
not a good basis for its deletion.
74
HALOT, 1950. The preposition has temporal
significance. Cook (Aramaic Ezra and Daniel, 280)
suggests that it “signals accompaniment extended to
the idea of duration: the visions that he saw where
those that accompanied the night.”
75
James Bejon, Chapter 7, 42
(Unpublished
document) extracted on January 9th, 2010 at
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_). Bejon cites Isaiah
8:22, 17: 12-14, Joel 2:1-2, Micah 3:6, Amos 5:18,
Zephaniah 1:15; Psalms 104: 20-22; .
76
Cook, (Aramaic Ezra and Daniel, 280) calls this an
exclamative.
77
HALOT (1824) has the meaning “look! behold!” It
occurs in Daniel 7:2, 5, 7, 13.
78
HALOT, 1980. The number “four” refers to the
main directions that people thought about at that time:
north, south, east and west.
79
James Bejon, Daniel Chapter 7, 40.Bejon cites
Jeremiah 49:36, Zechariah 2:6 and Ezekiel 37:9.
80
James Bejon (Daniel Chapter 7,39) suggests that
the “winds of the heavens” refers to “the hand of God
in world history.” He suggests that God’s activity in
world history is likened to “wind” which in an
indirect and mysterious manner works out his will in
world history.
81
HALOT, 1843. This is the preferred meaning in
HALOT.
82
HALOT, 1843.
This meaning is in the LXX,
Theodotion, and Vulgate.
83
Baldwin, Daniel, 138. The TH on Daniel suggests
that this refers to an ocean that covered the earth at the
time of creation.
Some scholars think it is a
reference to a mythological sea. See Lucas, Daniel
177-78.
84
Lucas, Daniel, 158. Lucas argues that the context in
Daniel “seems to require that the “great sea” is not
(merely) the Mediterranean but a mythological
118
symbol.” He cites A. Gardner, “The Great Sea of
Dan. VII 2,” VT 49: 412-412 Gardner suggests that
the author of Daniel 7:2 may have drawn this ideas
from Psalms 104:25.
85
Goldingay, Daniel, 160. Goldingay explains that
the expression ‘Great Sea’ “elsewhere always denotes
the Mediterranean and is a standard title for it.” He
argues that the Bible refers to the mythic sea by the
more general term “the sea” or “the deep.” See
Numbers 34:6.
86
James Bejon (Daniel Chapter 7, 39).
87
The verb is a peal participle.
88
Goldingay (Daniel, 161) agrees. “The four creatures
emerge from the ocean consecutively, not
concurrently, although this in itself hardly excludes
the possibility of understanding that the kings they
represent as contemporaries.”
89
HALOT, 1874.
90
Longman (Daniel, 183) notes that the origin of these
images is uncertain. They may have come from the
“hybrid beasts” in Mesopotamian art. Some scholars
believe that the images come from Babylonian
divination texts. Lucas (Daniel, 178) argues that
Hosiah 13:7-8 is the most likely source of the images.
He adds that for a Jew, these beasts would have been
particularly abhorrent since they were unclean
according to the Mosaic food laws.
91
HALOT, 1938. The verb means, “go up, come up.”
Here it is a Peal participle. It is found in 2:29a; 4:12;
7:3, 7, 20.
92
HALOT, 1999. Here it is a Peal participle.
93
GeCL97.
94
Longman, Daniel, 181. The symbolism may allude
to the Enuma Elish, the Babylonian creation myth.
This myth describes the struggle between Marduk and
the chaotic forces of Tiamat, the Sea.
95
Peter Gentry, Kingdom Through Covenant, 2d
edition, 604.
96
Ibid.
97
The Greek and Latin versions have “lioness.”
Although the prepositional phrase is “to her”, the
feminine suffix may refer back to the word “beast.”
98
Baldwin (Daniel, 139) notes that the lion was also a
symbol of dominion and majesty. Lucas (Daniel, 178)
cites L. Ryken, J.C. Wilhoit, and T. Longman III (eds)
Dictionary of Biblical Imagery (Downers Grove: IVP,
1998), 514-15. He explains that a lion symbolized
“boldness, ferocity, destructive power and irresistible
strength.” Nebuchadezzar is compared to lion in
Jeremiah 4:7; 49:19; 50:17. However, the symbol
could refer to either a king or a kingdom.
99
The pronoun is a feminine suffix. The Greek and
Latin versions have “lioness.” However, Collins
(Daniel, 274) suggests that it may refer to back to
“beast” or “first” which are feminine.
100
Fauna and Flora of the Bible, 82-84.
101
Lucas (Daniel, 178) cites L. Ryken, J.C. Wilhoit,
and T. Longman III (eds) Dictionary of Biblical
Imagery (Downers Grove: IVP, 1998), 223. He
explains that the eagle symbolizes “speed, power and
Consultant Notes on Daniel
rapacity.” Nebuchadnezzar’s army is compared to an
eagle in Ezekiel 17:3 and in Habakkuk 1:8.
102
Steinmann, Daniel, 342.
103
Hill, Daniel, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary:
Daniel–Malachi (Revised Edition) vol. 8, p. 135.
104
Cook, Aramaic Ezra and Daniel, 281.
105
TOB.
106
There are at least two views: (1) Some think it has
a positive meaning. Following this view it symbolizes
Nebuchadnezzar’s return to a stable state of mind
(Daniel 4). (2) Others interpret it in a negative way.
They think that it refers to an act of judgment. The
beast loses speed and power. See the discussion in
Lucas, Daniel, 178-79.
Goldingay (Daniel, 162)
interprets in a positive way.
107
Lucas, Daniel, 160-61. HALOT (1930) has: “to lift
up.”
108
The verb is a Hophal perfect.
109
See the discussion in Goldingay, Daniel, 162.
110
The Old Greek and Theodotion have “human feet.”
111
BFrCL88
112
The feminine suffix probably refers back to the
word “beast.”
113
HALOT (1824) suggests the meaning “look!
behold!” The word occurs in Daniel 7:2, 5, 7, 13.
114
The Old Greek lacks the word “second.”
Theodotion omits “other.”
115
Baldwin (Daniel, 139) notes that the Syrian brown
bear could weigh up to 250 kilos and had a voracious
appetite.
116
Lucas (Daniel, 178) cites L. Ryken, J.C. Wilhoit,
and T. Longman III (eds), Dictionary of Biblical
Imagery (Downers Grove: IVP, 1998), 27-32.
117
TH on Daniel.
118
It is a Hophal perfect. It is similar to the verb in
7:4.
119
HALOT, 1969.
120
James Bejon, Chapter 7, 46-47 (Unpublished
document) extracted on January 9th, 2010 at
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_).
121
The TH on Daniel suggests “half crouching.”
122
(1) Some commentators think that the position of
the bear refers to a division or partnership in the
Medo-Persian Empire. The Empire was made up of
both the Medes and the Persians. Eventually the
Persians gained power over the Medes. (2) Others
think that the image simply describes the strange
shape of the monster-like beast. See Goldingay,
Daniel, 162.
123
Baldwin, Daniel, 139. For other views, see the
discussion by Lucas, Daniel, 179.
124
Steinmann, Daniel, 343.
125
Steinmann, Daniel, 344.
126
La Bible du Semeur.
127
HALOT, 1950.
128
Hartman & Di Lella (Daniel, 205) interpret it to
mean, “fangs and tusks.”
129
See the discussion by Lucas (Daniel, 179). (1)
Some scholars interpret the image to refer to three
Babylonian kings. (2) Others interpret the three ribs
119
as the three kingdoms replaced by the Median or
Medo-Persian Empire. For example, Showers suggests
Lydia, Babylon and Egypt. (3) Some interpret the
three ribs as three rulers of the Medo-Persian Empire.
(4) It may be best to consider the three ribs as a
powerful image of an animal who is still hungry after
finishing to eat its last victim.
130
HALOT, 1899.
131
Also see La Nouvelle Version Segond “on lui
disait.”
132
See La Bible du Semeur.
133
See the BFrCL88.
134
Some commentators (Showers, The Most High
God, 76) thinks the image describes the Medo-Persian
empire’s desire to constantly conquer more countries.
Others (e.g. Lucas, Daniel 180) think that the image
depicts God stirring up the Medes against Babylon.
135
It is a Peal participle, masculine plural. The
pronoun is feminine, referring back to beast.
136
HALOT, 1968.
137
GeCL97.
138
Steinmann, Daniel, 338.
139
“flesh,” HALOT, 1840.
140
“after this.” HALOT, 1831.
141
The verb is a Peal participle of the verb “to be.”
142
BFrCL88.
143
HALOT (1824) suggests the meaning “look!
behold!” It occurs in Daniel 7:2, 5, 7, 13.
144
HALOT, 1931;
GeCL97, Collins, Lucas,
Goldingay, Steinmann.
145
BDB, 649. Most English and French versions refer
to a leopard.
146
See Habakkuk 1:8. Showers (The Most High God,
76) interprets the image as referring to Alexander the
Great, who was known for his fast moving army. In
eight years his army conquered land from Greece all
the way to India. Others (Cook, Aramaic Ezra and
Daniel, 284) have noted that Cyrus of Persian was also
known as having great swiftness (Isaiah 41:3).
147
Baldwin, Daniel, 39.
148
Scholars differ in how they interpret this image.
See the discussion in Lucas (Daniel, 180). (1) The
four wings may symbolize the speed of the beast. (2)
Those who think the leopard symbolizes Persia,
interpret the number four as referring to four kings.
(See Daniel 11:2).
(3) Those who think that the
leopard symbolizes Greece, interpret the four wings
and four heads as referring to four generals who
succeeded Alexander the Great. (4) Lucas (Daniel,
180) suggests the number “four” echoes the phrase
“four corners of the earth.” Following this view, the
image implies the great extent of the empire.
149
This corresponds to the symbolic meaning of the
animal as a kingdom that expanded at a very fast
speed. This was especially true of the Greek Empire
when ruled by Alexander the great.
This is the
interpretation that this followed in these notes.
150
Steinmann, Daniel, 345.
151
The Qere is singular.
152
HALOT (1840-41) has “side.”
153
The Ketib is plural.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
154
Scholars differ in how they interpret this image.
See the discussion in Lucas (Daniel, 180). Those who
think the third beast symbolizes Persia, interpret the
number four as four kings. (See Daniel 11:2). Those
who think that the leopard symbolizes Greece,
interpret the four heads as the four generals who
succeeded Alexander the Great. Lucas (Daniel, 180)
suggests the number four has a more general meaning
in that it may be similar to the phrase “four corners of
the earth. Following this view, the phrase would
describe the great extent of the empire.
155
Steinmann (Daniel, 345-46) suggests that it is
premature to speak of the heads as four separate
kingdoms, since this information is not revealed until
the following vision in Daniel 8 where the goat
represents Greece as having four horns that represent
four kings who succeed one great horn. However, in
7:7 the four heads do not replace one head. Steinmann
argues that the heads in Daniel 7 do not parallel the
horns in Daniel 8.
Steinmann (p. 346) notes that some scholars who
interpret the third beast to represent Persia interpret
the four heads as the four Persian kings mentioned in
the Bible (Cyrus, Ahasuerus/ Xerxes, Artaxerxes, and
Darius II/III or the four kings prophesied in Daniel
11:2 (Cambyses, Gaumata, Darius I, and Xerxes).
Steinmann notes that the “mistaken identification of
the four heads of the leopard in 7:6 with the four
Persian kings in 11:2 is one of many reasons why the
widely accepted critical theory about the second, third,
and fourth beasts (that the bear symbolizes Media, the
leopard symbolizes Persia, and the fourth beast
symbolizes Greece) is untenable.”
156
Lucas, Daniel, 180; Steinmann, Daniel, 346.
157
See the BFrCL88.
158
Steinmann, Daniel, 347.
159
GeCL97.
160
“after this.” HALOT, 1831.
161
GeCL97.
162
The verb is a Peal participle with the verb “to be.”
163
BFrCL88.
164
BFrCL88.
165
La Nouvelle Version Segond.
166
HALOT (1824) has the meaning “look! behold!”
The same word occurs in Daniel 7:2, 5, 7, 13.
167
HALOT, 1850.
168
HALOT, 1811.
169
GeCL97.
170
See HALOT, 1895.
171
The verb is a Peal participle.
172
The verb is a Haphel participle. The same verb is
used in 2:34c, 40b, 44c; 6:24; 7:7, 23.
173
GeCL97; BFrCL88.
174
HALOT, 1983.
175
The verb is a Peal participle.
176
HALOT, 1989.
177
HALOT, 1999. Here it is a Pael participle.
178
BFrCL88.
179
GeCL97.
180
La Bible du Semeur.
181
See Kedar-Kopfstein, ,TDOT 13: 167-74.
182
120
Lucas, Daniel, 180.
Steinmann, Daniel, 348.
184
Lucas (Daniel, 180) notes that by metonymy the
horn came to symbolize the people who held power.
“In Mesopotamian art, gods and deified kings have
horned headgear.” See “Horn,” in Ryken et al. [eds]
Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, 1998: 400. For the
different ways scholars interpret this symbol, see the
end note at 7:20a.
There are different interpretations of the ten horns.
1.
Some interpret the ten horns to depict ten
co-regnant kings These correspond to the ten
iron and clay toes of the Nebuchadnezzar
statue. This seems to be the majority view of
conservative
commentators.
See
also
Revelations 17:8-12.
2.
Other commentators have interpreted the ten
kings as ten successive Roman emperors
(James Jordan, The Handwriting on the Wall,
2005: 422-424) John Evans, The Four
Kingdoms of Daniel (Xulon Press, 2004): 14751..
3.
Still other commentators interpret the
number ten in a figurative sense to mean
“many.” In other words, the last kingdom
would be ruled by many rulers.
James Bejon gives four reasons for preferring the first
view.
1. Elsewhere in Daniel, horns depict coregents. See Daniel 8:3, 20, where the two
horns depict the kings of Media and Persia
and the four horns of the goat depict the four
coextensive kingships of the Seleucids,
Ptolemies, Pergamonians, and Macedonians
(8:23)
2. The Book of Revelation refers to ten kings
who receive authority as kings (Revelation
17:8-12).
3. The eleventh horn uproots three horns. It is
difficult to understand how one king might
uproot three successive horns.
4. The beast’s ten horns are parallel to the ten
toes of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue, which sees
to depict ten coregent kings.
See James Bejon, Chapter 7, 58 (Unpublished
document) extracted on January 9th, 2010 at
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_).
185
Ibid., 172.
186
Gentry (Kingdom Through Covenant, 2d edition,
603) suggests that this second dream is a parody of
divine creation, an anti-creation, where God makes
humans in the divine image to rule the world.
However, pride, the original sin is at the center of the
earthly kingdoms. Similarly, Hamilton (With the
Clouds of Heaven, 90) suggests that Daniel’s dream
would have evoked in his audience an inter-textual
connection with Genesis 1:26-28 and Psalms 8. Man
enjoyed dominion until he was tempted by a beast, the
serpent, and sinned (Genesis 3:1-7). The serpent
usurped the dominion given to the man. Hamilton
183
Consultant Notes on Daniel
suggests that the phrase son of man would have
evoked the first man, Adam. Psalm 8:4 asks “what is
man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man
that you care for him? The verses that follow answer
the question. God gave ‘dominion’ to the ‘son of
man’ over the beasts of the field’.
187
Gentry, How to Read and Understand the Biblical
Prophets, 111.
188
Ibid., 112.
189
Ibid., 112.
190
Some commentators have noted that the kings of
Babylon who succeeded Nebuchadnezzar are included
in the figure of his kingship. Bejon suggests that
Nebuchadnezzar is Babylon’s figurehead. (James
Bejon, Chapter 7, 43 (Unpublished document)
2010
at
extracted
on
January
9th,
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_).
191
Steinmann, Daniel, 342.
192
Hill, Daniel, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary:
Daniel–Malachi (Revised Edition) vol. 8, p. 135.
193
Steinmann, Daniel, 344-45. Some commentators
have also suggested that the three ribs may represent
the three major countries that the Medo-Persian
Empire conquered: Lydia (ca. 547 B.C.), Babylon
(539 B.C.) and Egypt (525 B.C).
194
Miller, Daniel, 199.
195
Ibid., 345.
196
Miller (Daniel, 200) mentions “(1) Antipater, and
later Cassander, gained control of Greece and
Macedonia; (2) Lysimachus ruled Thrace and a large
part of Asia Minor; (3) Seleucus I Nicator governed
Syria, Babylon, and much of the Middle East (all of
Asia except Asia Minor and Palestine); and (4)
Ptolemy I Soter controlled Egypt and Palestine.”
197
Steinmann, Daniel, 346.
198
Ibid.
199
Hill, Daniel, 136.
200
Ibid.
201
Hill (Daniel, 200) cites Seow, Daniel, 102.
202
Later in Daniel 7:19 it is described as having
bronze claws.
203
Parry, Desolation of The Temple and Messianic
Enthronement in Daniel 11:36-12:3, 492.
204
Parry, Desolation of The Temple and Messianic
Enthronement in Daniel 11:36-12:3, 494.
205
Parry, Desolation of The Temple and Messianic
Enthronement in Daniel 11:36-12:3, 500ff.
206
Ibid., 488. Parry cites a list of references given by
G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary
on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1999), 684-85.
207
See Rowley, Darius the Mede and the Four World
Empires in the Book of Daniel (Cardiff: University of
Wales, 1959), 74-75.
208
John Calvin, Commentaries on the book of the
Prophet Daniel (trans. Thomas Myers; vol. 13 of
Calvin’s
Commentaries;
Edinburgh:
Calvin
Translation Society, 1846; repr. Grand Rapids Baker,
1996), 332-80 as cited by Jason Thomas Parry,
121
Desolation of The Temple and Messianic
Enthronement in Daniel.
209
Young, Daniel, 141-50.
210
J. Baldwin, Daniel, 147, 161-62.
211
P. Gentry, How to Read and Understand the
Biblical Prophets, 111.
212
Jason S. DeRouchie, accessed December 23, 2019
at
http://jasonderouchie.com/derouchie-lectures-ondaniel/lect26-daniel/
213
Jason Thomas Parry, Desolation of The Temple
and Messianic Enthronement in Daniel 11:36-12:3
JETS 54:3 (Sept 2011): 487-491.
214
Rather than labelling the fourth beast as the Roman
Empire or a restoration of the Roman empire, Bejon
(Daniel Chapter 7, 13) calls it “a spiritual kingdom –
the conclusion and culmination of the first three
beasts` wantonness and brutality. It depicts the
worldwide empire of Satan.”
215
Steinmann, Daniel, 342-48.
216
Stephen Miller, Daniel, NAC, 55-56.
217
Jim Hamilton, With the Clouds of Heaven, 90-94
218
Dale Ralph Davis, The Message of Daniel, 95-96.
219
J. Collins, Daniel, 297-98.
220
Lucas, Daniel, 188-91.
221
Goldingay, Daniel, 176.
222
André Lacocque, The Book of Daniel, trans. D.
Pellauer (Atlanta, Ge: John Knox, 1979), 51.
223
R. J. M. Gurney, “The Four Kingdoms of Daniel 2
and 7,” Themlios 2 (1977): 39-45.
224
John Walton, “The Four Kingdoms of Daniel,”
JETS 29 (1986): 35-36.
225
Goldingay, Daniel, 176.
226
Tremper Longman III, Daniel NIVAC, 82.
227
Iain M. Duguid, Daniel, 36-37.
228
Hartman and Di Lella, Daniel, 212.
229
Goldingay, Daniel, 152-53.
230
See also the GeCL97.
231
HALOT, 1987.
232
Peal participle.
233
HALOT (1824) has the meaning “look! behold!”
The same word occurs again in Daniel 7:2, 5, 7, 13.
234
Lucas, Daniel, 164.
235
Peal Perfect. See HALOT (1939): “to go up, come
up.”
236
HALOT, 1866.
237
BFrCL88.
238
BFrCL88.
239
HALOT, 1953.
240
Lucas, Daniel, 161.
241
Ibid., 164.
242
HALOT, 1918. It is a Pael participle. The same
verb occurs in 7:11, 20, 25.
243
Goldingay, Daniel, 142.
244
Lucas, Daniel, 161.
245
Goldingay, Daniel, 142.
246
Lucas (Daniel, 161) notes that the author tends to
“make additions that sharpen up more general
statements or descriptions when he repeats them.”
247
Steinmann, Daniel, 348; Baldwin, Daniel, 140;
Miller, Daniel, 202.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
248
Baldwin, Daniel, 140.
Gentry, Kingdom Through Covenant, 2d edition,
624.
250
Gentry (Kingdom Through Covenant, 2d edition,
636-37) argues that “the vision in Daniel 7 applies to
both the first coming and the second coming. In the
first coming, the little horn is the Jewish nation. They
are anti-Christ, or opposed to the Messiah in general:
he came unto his own, and his own people did not
receive him (John 1:11). As Daniel 9:26a says, it is
the people of the coming Messiah who are responsible
for the destruction of the city and the sanctuary. This
fulfillment is then typical of the final antichrist, who
works at the very end times.” He adds, “From one
point of view, referring to the first coming and the
destruction of Jerusalem, the seventy sabbaticals are to
be interpreted literally. What could not be understood
until the coming of Jesus and the teaching of the
apostles is that the “time, times, and half a time” in
Daniel 7:25 and 12:7 are to be understood
symbolically as a period of suffering for believers, the
saints who inherit the kingdom of the Messiah, and
this refers to the period between the Messiah’s first
and second comings, which ends with the Antichrist of
whom Daniel 7:25 speaks. So Daniel 7 applies to both
the first and second comings which ends with the
Antichrist of whom Daniel 7:25 speaks” (p 639).
251
Hamilton, With the Clouds of Heaven, 94-98.
252
Hamilton, With the Clouds of Heaven, 101.
253
Longman, Daniel, 190.
254
Ibid.
255
Wallace, The Message of Daniel, 123-24.
256
Goldingay (Daniel, 164) thinks that there is
continuity in perspective between verses 8 and 9. He
suggests that the court scene takes place on earth.
257
BFrCL88.
258
La Bible du Semeur.
259
HALOT, 1903.
260
Scholars differ in the way they interpret the image
of “thrones.” See the discussion by Lucas, Daniel,
181-82. Early Christians thought that the thrones were
for God and for the one who was like a son of man.
Rabi Akiba said that there was one for God and
another for David.
Some modern commentators
interpret the thrones as referring to the idea of a
counsel of the gods as in ANE myths. The New
Testament (Revelation 4-5, 20:4) speaks of “thrones”
for those who would judge.
261
The KJV has “were cast down.”
262
BFrCL88.
249
263
See HALOT, 1955. The word occurs in 7:9, 13, 22.
The title may refer to the fact that God has always
lived. It may also imply that a person who was old
would be wise and could make good judgments.
265
GeCL97.
266
BFrCL88.
267
Goldingay, Daniel, 142.
268
Bejon, Chapter 7, 94. (Unpublished document)
2010
at
extracted
on
January
9th,
264
122
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_).
269
HALOT, 1895.
270
GeCL97.
271
BFrCL88.
272
Baldwin (Daniel, 141) cites Psalms 51:7. Lucas
(Daniel, 182) notes that in Daniel “whiteness” is a
mark of purity (11:35; 12:10). Goldingay (Daniel,
165) interprets “whiteness” in this context as a symbol
for brightness, splendour or glory.
273
Some cultures may not be familiar with “snow.” It
has been described as particles of water that are
frozen in the upper air and which fall to the earth as
soft white flakes.
274
GrCL97.
275
HALOT, 1933.
276
See the BFrCL88, note.
277
Longman, Daniel, 186.
278
The word “white” may have implied “purity” in the
Hebrew culture.
279
BFrCL88.
280
See Lucas, Daniel, 161, note 9 and page 182.
281
TOB; La Bible du Semeur.
282
Cook (Aramaic Ezra and Daniel, 288) cites
Stephen Kaufman, The Akkadian Influences on
Aramaic, In the Oriental Institute of the University of
Chicago, Assyriological Studies 19 (Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press, 1974).
283
Another possibility is “His throne was made from
fire” (NCV) See also the GeCL97.
284
La Nouvelle Version Segond.
285
Goldingay, Daniel, 142.
286
HALOT, 1990.
287
Lucas (Daniel, 182) notes that fire is a common
symbol for God’s presence. He suggests that here the
idea is that God is present in “awesome and
dangerous splendor.” It could also include the idea of
a destructive judgment.”
288
Longman, Daniel, 186.
289
BFrCL88.
290
HALOT, 1845.
291
HALOT, 1854. This is a Peal participle.
292
HALOT, 1926.
293
The verb is a Peal participle.
294
HALOT, 1932.
295
HALOT, 1967.
296
Lucas, Daniel, 158; Goldingay, Daniel, 142.
297
BFrCL88; Nouvelle Segond, TOB.
298
La Nouvelle Version Segond.
299
TOB.
300
BFrCL88; La Bible du Semeur.
301
TH on Daniel.
302
This is in contrast to which can also mean,
“to worship.”
303
The verb has a participial form.
304
BFrCL88.
305
GeCL97.
306
HALOT, 1968.
307
TH on Daniel.
308
Peal imperfect.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
123
343
309
In some languages it may be more natural to
combine the two lines. If that is true in your language,
see the BFrCL88.
310
See HALOT, 1967. It can also have a temporal or
spatial meaning.
311
HALOT (1852) lists “judgment,” “justice,” as well
as other possibilities.
312
HALOT (1852) suggest that it refers to a judicial
assembly. See also 7:22, 26.
313
La Nouvelle Version Segond, GeCL97.
314
La Bible du Semeur.
315
See Lucas, Daniel, 183.
316
Steinmann, Daniel, 350. Steinmann cites Rabbi
Akiba.
317
Steinmann, Daniel, 352.
318
Baldwin, Daniel, 141.
319
Steinmann (Daniel, 352) also cites Isaiah 61:10; 2
Corinthians 5:4’ Galatians 3:27 and Revelations 1:14
and elsewhere in Revelation.
320
Baldwin, Daniel, 141.
321
Bejon, Chapter 7, 95 (Unpublished document)
extracted
on
January
9th,
2010
at
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_).
322
Steinmann, Daniel, 353.
323
Cook (Aramaic Ezra and Daniel, 290) omits this
phrase.
324
It is a Peal participle.
325
It seems to occur in the middle of a sentence and it
is followed immediately by another connector.
326
See Montgomery (l927): 302. He interprets the
phrase based on the similarity of this connector with
the Hebrew .
327
Goldingay, Daniel, 142, 145, n. 11a; Lucas,
Daniel, 159; Collins, Daniel, 275, n. 35.
328
English versions translate it differently. Some use
the connector: “then” (KJV, RSV52, NRSV89,
REB89, NJPS85, NIV84, NJB). Others do not use a
connector (GW, NLT96, TEV).
329
HALOT, 1918-20.
330
Goldingay, Daniel, 142, 145, n. 11a; Lucas,
Daniel, 159; Collins, Daniel, 275, n. 35.
331
HALOT, 1970. HALOT interprets it to mean,
“sound” in this context.
332
It is a Peal participle.
333
There is a textual problem. The LXX and
Theodotion omit this phrase. The Vulgate translates
it. Most modern English versions also translate it.
334
Steinmann, Daniel, 354.
335
This may be the view presented in the translation
GW and NCV.
336
BFrCL88.
337
BFrCL88.
338
Steinmann, Daniel, 354.
339
HALOT, 1806.
340
The feminine pronominal subject refers to the beast
as the subject of the verb “given.”
341
This is similar to the NIV84, but in an active form.
342
Steinmann, Daniel, 354.
The subject of the verb is feminine and refers back
to the beast and not to the beast’s body (masculine).
344
Goldingay, Daniel, 142.
345
Lucas, Daniel, 159.
346
So also the NIV84, NCV, and the GeCL97.
347
Also GeCL97.
348
TOB
349
Baldwin (Daniel, 142) notes that “whoever the
original beasts stood for, their kingdoms continue to
have a recognizable identity, and (ii) history has not
yet come to an end, despite the intervention of God’s
judgment, though a season and a time implies a
limited future.”
350
TOB.
351
HALOT, 1944.
352
See the BFrCL88; La Bible du Semeur.
353
Goldingay, Daniel, 142, 145, n. 12a.
354
HALOT, 1825.
355
Scholars have debated what this exactly means.
Some think that it means that these kingdoms retained
their identity in some way even after their rulers lost
their power. Lucas (Daniel, 183) suggests that the
phrase emphasizes that God judges justly and that
Israel would eventually rule over the nations that
oppressed her.
356
Some of those who hold a premillennial view of
eschatology think that these three first kingdoms refer
to Gentile nations that will continue to exist after the
fourth beast is destroyed although they will no longer
have any power to rule.
357
Steinmann (Daniel, 339) suggests that זְמָ ןis
probably a loan word from Persian and that it is used
in Daniel as an equivalent to the second word ﬠִ דָּ ן.
358
HALOT, 1866.
359
BFrCL88.
360
Contra Goldingay, Daniel, 164.
361
Some versions interpret that the poetry begins at
the second clause. See the NJPS85, CEV95, RSV52,
NRSV89, NET08. The NIV84, TEV, NLT84, NLT07
and the REB89 do not mark these two verses as poetry
although some of them do so at 7:9-10.
362
The phrase is a combination of the peal participle
and the peal perfect first person .
363
This phrase is similar to the phrase my visions by
night in 7:2.
364
BFrCL88.
365
La Nouvelle Version Segond Révisée (Bible à la
Colombe).
366
HALOT, 1950. The preposition has temporal
significance.
367
The NJPS85, NLT96, TEV and the NIV84 have:
“vision.”
368
HALOT (1824) has the meaning “look! behold!”
The same word occurs in Daniel 7:2, 5, 7, 13.
369
HALOT, 1950. The preposition has a spatial
meaning. The LXX has “upon” as in Matthew
24:30; 26:64. Theodotion has ”with” as in Mark
14:62; Rev 1:7.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
370
Baldwin (Daniel, 142) notes that this term is often
used when an author describes the presence of the
Lord. Longman (Daniel, 187) cites Exodus 13:21;
Psalms 68:4; Psalms 104: 3-4.
The image is
particularly used in contexts of war and judgment.
See for example, Isaiah 19:1; Nahum 1:3. Longman
notes that the term “Rider on the Clouds” was also
used in the Ugaritic literature of Baal.
371
Some commentators believe that there is an
important exegetical distinction between the
prepositions “with” and “on.” Lucas (Daniel, 184)
cites Montgomery, The Book of Daniel, 303; Hartman
& Di Lella, The Book of Daniel, 206. However,
others have shown that the Aramaic preposition can
mean either “with” or “in” and more importantly, that
writers associated God with clouds in a variety of
ways.
372
The preposition ﬠִ םis supported by the MT,
Theodotion, Mark 14:62, Revelation 1:7. The OG,
Matthew 24:30; 26:64 have epi (presupposing ‘al).
Lucas (Daniel, 162) suggests that this looks like a
change to the more normal use of the imagery (e.g. Ps.
104:3.
373
BFrCL88.
374
GeCL97.
375
This is supported by the Old Greek, Matthew
24:30; 26:64 which have . Lucas (Daniel, 162)
suggests that this looks like a change towards the
more normal usage.
376
La Bible du Semeur;
377
Peter Gentry, “The Son of Man in Daniel 7,” 74.
Gentry notes that if this verse does not refer to an
appearance or theophany of Yahweh, it would be the
only exception in about seventy occurrences in the
OT. He remarks, “Thus “coming on the clouds of
heaven” is a clear indication of deity.
378
GeCL97.
379
The perfect verb of “to be” is used with the Peal
participle of the verb “to come.”
380
BFrCL88.
381
The answer depends in part on whether the thrones
were on earth or in heaven. Goldingay (Daniel, 164)
thinks that verb “came” in 7:22 indicates that Ancient
of Days came from heaven and pronounced judgment
on earth. He notes that elsewhere in the Old
Testament God normally holds judgment on earth.
Lucas (Daniel, 181) follows Collins, (Daniel, 303)
who locates the events in “mythic space.”
382
The BFrCL88 has “semblable à.” According to
Showers (The Most High, 80) the word “like” implies
that this person was “more than human.” Showers
supports this view citing the phrase “with the clouds
of Heaven” which is often used to refer to deity.
Showers says that he was “deity incarnated in human
form.” For a different view, see Collins, (Daniel,
305) who interprets the phrase “like a son of man” as
not necessarily implying that this person was different
from a human being.
383
HALOT, 1896.
124
384
Daniel 7:1-8 is a parody of Genesis 1. The four
beasts emerging from the waters of chaos contrast
with creation in Genesis 1. They contrast with the son
of man who is distinctly human, and thus weak and
insignificant compared to the beasts, with no inherent
power or authority. The contrst between the beasts
and the son of man is a contrast between a parody of
the divine image and the divine image itself, that is the
image as it was intended to be. See the discussion of
this by Stephen Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty,
216-17.
385
Note that the expressions that describe the saints,
who were given kingdom and power in 7:18, 22, 27,
are also said of the one who is like a son of man in
7:14. Peter Gentry explains that in the ancient Near
East, “the King in himself both represented and stood
for the people as a whole.” In this context, the one
like a son of man has transferred these powers over to
the saints. See Peter Gentry, “The Son of Man in
Daniel 7: Individual or Corporate?” in Acorns to Oaks:
the Primacy and Practice of Biblical Theology.
Festschrift for Dr. Geoff Adams, ed. Michael A. G.
Haykin (Dundas, ON: Joshua Press, 2003), 71.
386
This seems to be the view of the TH on Daniel.
See the NJB footnote. But as Baldwin (Daniel, 150)
notes, if this was the case one would think that the
term would have been “son of Israel/Jacob.”
387
See John J. Collins, Daniel, 310. Following this
view, he was a leader of the angelic host (saints of the
Most High). Collins suggests that it refers to the
archangel Michael (p. 318).
388
Another interpretation is that it refers to an exalted
human being.
389
Collins (Daniel, 306) notes that “the earliest
interpretations and adaptations of the ‘one like a
human being,’ Jewish and Christian alike, assume that
the phrase refers to an individual and is not a symbol
for a collective entity.” Following this view the one
like a son of man was a representative of the saints of
the Most High. He was the ultimate king (Psalms
110:1). One of the earliest examples is found in the
Similitudes of Enoch (1 En. 46:1). See also 4 Ezra 13.
The messianic interpretation was also prevalent in
rabbinic literature, and according to Collins, remained
the majority opinion among the medieval Jewish
commentators. Collins, himself, does not hold this
view.
390
See Matthew 24:30; 25:31; 26:64. This is also the
view of the New Testament authors. See Hebrews
2:6-9; Revelation 1:7, 13; 14:14. Commentators differ
as to whether Jesus used this imagery of “coming on
the clouds of heaven” before Caiphas (Matt 26:64;
Mark 14:62; Luke 22:60) to refer to his enthronement
at his first coming or at his second coming. Parry
((“Desolation of the Temple and Messianic
Enthronement in Daniel 11:36-12:3,” JETS 54:3
(2011):494) argues that there is no reason to interpret
the phrase in any way other than its usual meaning (cf.
Matt 23:39; 26:29; John 13:19; 14:7; Rev 14:13) that
is, ‘from then on.’
Consultant Notes on Daniel
391
The proper Greek translation of this phrase in
Aramaic is υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου as found in the OG and
Theodotion of Daniel 7:13. It is also the way the
Hebrew is translated in Ezekiel, Psalms 80:17 (18) and
Daniel 8:17.
392
This is usually translated by the vocative υἱὲ
ἀνθρώπου in Ezekiel.
393
Elsewhere occurs at Numbers 23:19,
Isaiah 51:12; 56:2; Jeremiah 49:18, 33; 50:40; 51:43;
Psalms 8:5; 80:18; 146:3; Job 16:21; 25:6; 35:8.
394
Peter Gentry, Kingdom Through Covenant, 2d
edition, 603, n. 6.
395
Dan Davis, The Semantic Content of ‘Son of
Man’” NOT 4, no. 3 (1990): 10.
396
See Andrew Streett, The Vine and The Son of Man,
(Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Pres, 2014). Some have
suggested that the phrase “son of man” in this context
has a collective or corporate meaning.
However,
there is no reason that this person be both an
individual and representative of his people, such as a
king in the ANE.
397
Lindsay
Kennedy
(http://mydigitalseminary.com/psalm-80-neglectedmessianic-psalm/) mentions the five unique
contributions that Psalm 80 makes to the messianic
profile in the Psalter (February 7, 2016):
1. A purely future hope: “…the king of Psalm
80 is clearly projected into the future.”
2. Association with national revival: “The
connection between the king an Israel in the
Psalm is so close that they appear to blur
together. …What happens to Israel’s king
happens to Israel. No other Psalm so clearly
links Israel’s national restoration with the
restoration of her king.”
3. Human viceregent over paradise: “…Edenlike language being applied to the king.
Since Israel is presented as a vineyard, and
her enemies as wild animals, it is fitting that
the king be presented as a new Adam
(=“son of Adam”, Ps 80:17). Streett goes so
far as to say Psalm 80 presents the king “as
a type of second Adam figure who will be set
up over a restored vine/vineyard” (pg. 80).”
4. The king and plant imagery: “No other
Psalm clearly describes the Davidic
kingdom as a vine. This provides a b ridge
to the language of the prophets (Isa 11:1, 19;
53:2).”
5. The Twelve Tribes Unified: “Only Psalm
80 species tht the king will reign over the
twelve unified tribes of Israel as they were
under Solomon and David (Palms 80:1-3,
11. Ezekiel 36-37 develops this idea.”
398
The BFrCL88 has: “un homme.”
HALOT, 1914.
400
The BFrCL88 has “un vieillard.”
401
The NJB has: “the One most venerable.”
402
Similarly, the GeCL97.
399
125
HALOT, 1972. In this context it is a Haphal
verb, third masculine plural with a masculine singular
object. It means, “to bring near, allow to enter.”
James Bejon suggests that the verb qrb could be a
subtle allusion to the son of man’s sacrifice in the NT
(John 12:12-43) since it often describes the
presentation of a sacrifice before the LORD (Ezra
6:10, 6:17.). See Bejon, Chapter 7, 112. (Unpublished
document) extracted on January 9th, 2010 at
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_).
404
BFrCL88 : La Nouvelle Version Segond Révisée.
The NET has: “was escorted.”
405
GeCL97.
403
406
Stephen Wellum, God the Son Incarnate (Wheaton,
IL: Crossway, 2016), 164. Wellum cites Psalms 8:4;
cf. Numbers 23:19; Job 25:6; Isaiah 51:12; 56:2;
Jeremiah 49:18, 33 (NASB); 50:40; 51:43).
407
Ibid.
408
Thomas Schreiner, New Testament Theology, 216
as cited by Stephen Wellum, God the Son Incarnate
(Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2016), 164
409
Steinmann, Daniel, 339-40. Steinmann also cites
Ezekiel 1:26 (“an image like the appearance of a
man”); Psalms 8:5 (ET 8:4); 80:18 (ET 80:17) “a son
of Adam/man”; Ezekiel 2:1, 3, 6, 8 (“son of man”);
Isaiah 52:14 (“sons of man”) and Psalms 4:3 [ET4:2];
49:3 [ET 49:2]; 62:10 [ET 62:9]; Lamentations 3:33
“sons of man.”
410
This is cited by E.C. Lucas, “The Book of Daniel,”
in M. J. Boda & G. J. McConville, editors, Dictionary
of the Old Testament: Prophets (Downers Grove, IL;
Nottingham, England: IVP Academic; Inter-Varsity
Press, 2012), 116.
411
Peter Gentry, How to Read and Understand
Biblical Prophecy, 112.
412
Ibid., 113.
413
Ibid.
414
Ibid. Gentry (How to Read and Understand the
Biblical Prophets, 113) gives the following additional
arguments:
1. In Daniel 7:27, the pronouns at the end of
the verse are singular and must refer to an
individual.
2. Just as the beasts are complex symbols and
refer to a heavenly power, an earthly king
and also the kingdom, so also the son of man
refers to a heavenly power as well as the
earthly kingdom.
3. The parallel of Daniel 7 with Daniel 2 links
the rock and the son of man so that the son
of man is a Davidic figure .
415
Collins, Daniel, 309.
416
Collins, Daniel, 308.
417
Collins, Daniel, 308.
418
Stephen Miller (Daniel, 207) cites J. J. Collins,
“The Son of Man and the Saints of the Most High in
the Book of Daniel,” JBL 93 (1974): 50–66.
419
Goldingay, Daniel, 178.
420
Lucas, Daniel, 192.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
421
E. Lucas, Daniel, 186-87.
Lucas, Daniel, 187.
423
Ibid.
424
Steinmann, Daniel, 356.
425
Steinmann, Daniel, 357.
426
Steinmann (Daniel, 357) cites Matthew 26:24;
Mark 14:21; cf. Luke 22:22. Lucas (Daniel, 201)
avoids entering the debate about the background of
Jesus’ use of the title “Son of Man” to describe
himself and his ministry. He does note that scholars
categorize the Son of Man sayings in the Synoptic
Gospels into three groups: “1. Those that refer to a
future ‘coming’ of the Son of Man; 2. Those that refer
to the suffering, death and resurrection of the Son of
Man; and 3. A small number that refer to the authority
of the Son of Man in the present (Mark 2:10, 28 and
parallels).”
427
Stephen Wellum, The Son of God Incarnate, 163.
428
Ibid. Wellum cites Psalms 8:4cf. Numbers 23:19;
Job 25:6; Isaiah 51:12; 56:2 Jeremiah 49:18, 33
(NASB); 50:40; 51:43.
429
Stephen Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty, 21617.
430
Ibid. Psalms 8:4-8 [MT8:5-9].
431
Ibid.
432
Stephen Wellum, The Son of God Incarnate, 164
433
Stephen Wellum, The Son of God Incarnate, 164.
434
Ibid.
435
Ibid., 164.
436
Ibid.
437
Thomas Schreiner, New Testament Theology, 216.
Schreiner explains that when Jesus steps into this
storyline as the self-designated Son of Man, he makes
a clear statement regarding his identity. He refers to
himself as the Son of Man in his ministry, his
suffering and resurrection and his future coming.
“The son of man is a new Adam fulfilling the role of
kingship originally given to Adam. At the same time,
riding on the clouds is what God does (cf Ps. 104.3;
Isa. 19:1). Daniel links the son of man with the rock
in chapter 2, suggesting an identity between the two.”
(page 654).
438
James Hamilton, With the Clouds of Heaven, 147.
439
Ibid.
440
Ibid., 149.
441
Gentry, How to Read and Understand the Biblical
Prophets, 114.
442
Ibid.
443
Ibid.
444
Steinmann (Daniel, 357) notes that the Son of Man
figure in the Similitudes of Enoch is based on Daniel
and is specifically identified as the Messiah (1 Enoch
46:1-5; 48:3-7, 10; 52:4. This is often dated to the
first century A.D. Harman (Daniel,172) suggests a
date of AD 70 or later. Steinmann also cites 4 Ezra
13 (late first century or early second century AD).
445
Steinmann, Daniel, 357.
446
Steinmann, Daniel, 356. J. Paul Tanner, Is
Daniel’s Seventy-Weeks Prophecy Messianic? Part 1,”
Bibliotheca Sacra 166 (April-June 2009); 181-200.
422
126
447
Wells, Person of Christ : A Biblical and Historical
Analysis of the Incarnation (Westchester, IL:
Crossway, 1984), 80.
448
See HALOT, 1889.
449
GeCL97.
450
The CEV95 has: “He was crowned king.”
The Aramaic word also occurs in Daniel
451
2:6, 37; 4:36, 5:18, 20; 7:14.
HALOT (1918) lists Daniel 2:39, 42, 44; 3:33:
4:18c, 26b, 36b; 5:7, 11, 16, 26, 28f; 6:2, 4f, 8, 27.
453
HALOT (1917) interprets this verse and verse 44
this way. Also 2:37, 44; 4:28, 33a; 5:18: 6:1; 7:14a,
18, 22, 27a.
454
GeCL98; La Bible du Semeur; BFrCL88.,
455
KB lists Daniel 6:29.
456
Goldingay, Daniel, 49
457
The NIV84 has a semicolon.
458
“nation, people.” HALOT, 1950.
459
“nation.” HALOT, 1815.
452
460
See also the lists in 3:7, 31; 5:19.
“tongue, language, language group, people.”
HALOT, 1909.
462
Peter Gentry, “The Son of Man in Daniel 7:
Individual or Corporate?” 72.
463
BFrCL88; NVSR,
464
The verb is an imperfect.
465
James Bejon, Chapter 7 : Beauty and the Beasts, 5.
20120
from
Taken
on
January
4th
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_
466
The La Nouvelle Version Segond Révisée has
“domination.”
467
GeCL97.
468
La Bible du Semeur; BFrCL88; TOB.
469
HALOT (1949): “remote time, eternity.”
470
HALOT, “kingdom, realm,” 1917-18.
La Bible du Semeur
471
GeCL97
472
“royaume,” BFrCL88; La Bible du Semeur
473
GeCL97.
474
Peter Gentry, How to Read and Understand the
Biblical Prophets, 110.
475
The TH on Daniel says that this “may be a literary
device to mark important transition points in the
discourse structure of the last half of Daniel.”
476
There is a textual problem. The Old Greek has: “in
these.” The Vulgate has: “in this.”
Some
commentators have emended the text to give other
meanings. However, a similar phrase has been found
in 1QAPGen2:10 “and my breath in my sheath.”
Therefore Lucas (Daniel, 162) suggests that the
consonantal text be accepted with a slight repointing:
“in its sheath” which would then mean, “in my body.”
477
HALOT, 1926-27.
478
The LXX and the Vulgate omit this phrase.
479
Some ancient Greek versions do this.
480
HALOT, 1902.
481
HALOT (1832-33) cites Daniel 4:5b, 19b; 5:6, 10;
7:15, 28.
461
Consultant Notes on Daniel
482
TOB.
See also GeCL97, which has “confused and
frightened.”
484
Some think that this person was Gabriel. See
Daniel 9:21.
485
HALOT, 1968; Longman, Daniel, 188.
486
, HALOT, 1892-83.
487
GeCL97.
488
Bejon, Chapter 7, 115. (Unpublished document)
2010
at
extracted
on
January
9th,
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_).
489
Ibid., 6.
490
The verb is in the imperfect.
491
For example, you may change the form of the
verb so that it does not show completed action.
The NRSV89 has: “would make known.”
492
See also the TOB.
493
The NJPS85 adds the verb “mean.” The object of
the verb is then not simply “kings” but the whole
clause. See the Notes below on the connector “who.”
494
BFrCL88.
495
The Masoretic text has “kings.” The LXX and
Vulgate translate “kingdoms.” Collins (Daniel, 275)
notes that the consonantal text of the two words are
similar and could have been easily confused. If the
original word was “kings” then the change to
“kingdoms” may have been made to harmonize with
7:23.
496
See the discussion in HALOT, 1917.
497
BFrCL88.
483
498
The second option makes a more obvious
connection to the four kingdoms in Daniel 2:38-43.
499
HALOT, 1968-69. In 7:3 the four beasts came up
() out of the sea. The verb here is . The
four beasts rose up from the land. The two phrases do
not necessarily contradict each other. In the second
the angel wanted to give a further explanation. The
four kingdoms had an earthly origin (Lucas, Daniel,
188).
500
BDB (1110) has: “to come on the scene of history.”
501
GeCL97.
502
SeeHALOT, 1918-19.
503
GeCL97.
504
GeCL97.
505
BFrCL88.
506
The NJB and NET08 do not have a connector.
They begins a new sentence at 7:18.
507
For example, see 7:14 where it is implied that the
Ancient of Days gave the kingdom to the one like the
son of man.
508
Goldingay, Daniel, 146.
509
See the discussion in Lucas, Daniel, 191. Collins
(Daniel, 316-18) suggests that support for this view
can be found in the Qumran literature as well.
510
See the discussion in Lucas, Daniel, 192.
511
This is the traditional Christian view of the phrase.
Baldwin (Daniel, 152) notes three points in favor of
this view: (1) The word in 7:27 is more often
used to refer to Israel as the holy people; (2) The
127
author does use the word “angels” in Daniel 8:13. He
could have used it here if he had wanted to be clear;
(3) Finally, these beings suffer and are defeated (7:21,
25) which does not seem to correspond to angels. Vern
Poythress argues that this term can refer to human
beings as well as angels in the O.T. See V.S.
Poythress, “The Holy Ones of the Most High in Daniel
vii,” VT 26 (1976): 208-13. See for example, Psalms
34:10.
512
Ringgren, ,TDOT 12: 542. This is the
traditional Jewish interpretation of the phrase. See
also the TH on Daniel; HALOT, 1948, 1966,.
513
This is most popular view today. See John J.
Collins, Daniel, 313-17; Lucas, Daniel, 191-92. In
Aramaic and in the Dead Sea Scrolls and elsewhere in
Daniel (4:13; 8:13) the phrase refers to angels.
Baldwin (Daniel, 152) notes three points that
commentators usually use to support the view that it
refers to angels: (1) In the Old Testament, the phrase
“holy ones” is usually used to refer to angels and not
men. (2) Secondly, the one who is like a son of man,
in 7:13, is a superhuman figure, so those associated
with him must also be superhuman, (3) The word
translated “people” in 7:27 can mean “host.”
514
Longman, Daniel, 189; Lucas, Daniel, 192. Lucas
explains that in Daniel 10-12 things on earth have an
earthly counterpart. He concludes that it may be
“misguided to make a sharp distinction between
‘angelic’ and ‘human’ in the referent of the imagery in
the vision.”
515
See especially Peter J. Gentry, “The Meaning of
‘Holy’ in the Old Testament,” Bib. Sac. 170: (Oct
2013).
516
Peter J. Gentry, “The Meaning of ‘Holy’ in the Old
Testament,” Bib. Sac. 170 (Oct 2013), 680.
517
GeCL97.
518
GeCL97.
519
Scholars have defined the word “holy” in different
ways. Some interpret it to mean, “pure, or morally
righteous.” Others have interpreted it to mean,
“separated from, or distinct from.” Bejon (Daniel
Chapter 7, 11) describes the primary sense of “holy”
in Daniel as “ ‘otherworldly; and ‘unearthly’ and
‘from a different realm to ours’. He says that Daniel’s
reference to ‘holy’ describes a group of people entirely
distinct from the beats of the earth – unworldly,
heavenly-minded, servants of the God of the heavens
as opposed to the power-hungry despots of the
nations.”
However, see Peter J. Gentry, “The
Meaning of ‘Holy’ in the Old Testament,” and also
Claude Bernard Costecalde, Aux origines du sacré
biblique (Éditions Letouzey et Ané, 1986).
520
See , HALOT, 1948. The standard form
of the title is . This is an Aramaic adjective,
definite and singular which means, “superior,
highest.” It is found in 3:26, 32; 5:18, 21 after the
word God and in 4:14, 21, 22, 29; 7:25a where it
occurs by itself.
521
Caragounis (The Son of Man, 75) who identifies
this person as distinct from the Most High God.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
Peter Gentry suggests that may be a
deliberate attempt to make a distinction between a
divine figure associated with the saints and yet
distinguished from Yahweh in some way. See Gentry,
“The Son of Man in Daniel 7,” 73.
See also
Hamilton, With the Clouds of Heaven, 151-53.
Hamilton notes that because of the similarity between
the statements in Daniel 7:14 and 7:27, we can be
certain that the Most High referred to with
and associated with the saints in the phrase ‘saints of
the Most High’ is the ‘one like a son of man’. Collins
seems confused: “it is not apparent why the plural
should be used for the subordinate figure.
522
See the discussion in Collins, Daniel, 312.
523
Goldingay (Daniel, 142) who also cites Calvin
and Lacocque.
524
James Bejon, “Chapter 7: Beauty and the Beasts,”
6.
Extracted on December 4, 2010 from
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_
525
HALOT (1965-66) “to receive.”
526
For the same use, see Daniel 5:31: “Darius the
Mede received the kingdom.” A number of
English versions translate literally “shall receive”
(RSV52, NRSV89, similarly TEV, NCV, NJPS85,
NIV84, NJB) or “will be given” (NLT96).
527
GeCL97.
528
GeCL97.
529
The TH on Daniel interprets this word as “royal
power.” HALOT interprets it this way in 2:37b and
verse 44. See also 4:31, 36; 5:18: 5:31; 7:14a, 18, 22,
27a.
530
HALOT lists Daniel 2:39-42, 44; 3:33: 4:18, 26, 36;
5:7, 11, 16, 26, 28f; 6:1, 3, 7, 26 as some of the
occurrences in the book of Daniel. HALOT interprets
the word as “kingdom of God” in 3:33; 4:34; 7:14b,
27b.
531
HALOT, lists Daniel 6:29.
532
HALOT, 1878.
533
Poythress, “The Holy Ones of the Most High in
Daniel VII,” VT 26: 208-13; G. F. Hasel, “The
Identity of ‘The Saints of the Most High’ in Daniel 7,”
Bib 56 (1975): 173–92;
J. Baldwin, Daniel,
(Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1978),151-52; M. Casey,
The Solution to the ‘Son of Man’ Problem (London:
T&T Clark, 2007), 83.
534
Steinmann, Daniel, 370.
535
Ibid. .
536
J. Collins, Daniel, 331-16.
537
Steinmann, Daniel, 366-69.
538
Ibid.
539
Steinmann, Daniel, 367. Steinmann explains that
֖ ִ קַ ִדּmodifies ֱאל ִ ָ֥היןand
the Aramaic adjective ישׁין
refers to “holy gods” in 4:5-6, 15 (ET 4:8-9, 18); 5:11.
He adds that the “term by itself used as a substantive
refers to “holy” angels in 4:10, 14, 20 (ET 4:13, 17,
23). These are called “watchers.” The Hebrew קָ דוֹשׁ
is used as a substantive referring to a “holy” angel in
8:13. But Steinmann notes that the Hebrew קָ דוֹשׁis
used as a substantive for the saints in 8:24.
128
540
See the discussion by Steinmann, Daniel, 368.
Steinmann, Daniel, 367-68.
542
Steinmann, Daniel, 367-68.
543
Steinmann, Daniel, 367, 369.
544
Steinmann, Daniel, 367, 369.
545
Steinmann, Daniel, 367, 369.
546
Steinmann, Daniel, 369-70.
547
Steinmann, Daniel, 357. See also V. S. Poythress’
article, “The Holy Ones of the Most High in Daniel
VII,” VT 26 [1976]: 208–13 and Baldwin Daniel,
151–52, who also argue against the angelic view.
548
Baldwin, Daniel, 152.
549
Peter Gentry, “The Son of Man in Daniel 7,” 73.
550
See , HALOT, 1948. The standard form
of the title is . This is an Aramaic adjective,
definite and singular which means, “superior,
highest.” It is found in 3:26, 32; 5:18, 21 after the
word God and in 4:14, 21, 22, 29; 7:25a where it
occurs by itself.
551
See Gentry, “The Son of Man in Daniel 7,” 71.
552
See Gentry, “The Son of Man in Daniel 7,” 71-72.
Gentry notes that the MT is supported by 4QDaniel a
(70 AD), 4QDaniel b (25BC-25AD) the OG, Latin
Vulgate and Syriac Peshitta all have the awkward
phrase “the people of the saints of the Most High”.
The more difficult reading is found in Daniel
Theodotion (4 BC?) has “saints of the Most High.”
Gentry suggests that the omission of “the people”
looks like it could be an insertion in MT to avoid
connecting the pronoun in v. 27 to the Most High.
Gentry adds that one could explain the MT as the
Maccabean form of the text of Daniel and possibly not
the original text. If the Theodotion reading is
accepted, then the argument proposed here is even
more obvious.
553
See also Hamilton, With the Clouds of Heaven,
151-53.
541
554
HALOT, 1962. The verb implies the idea “to ask.”
As a result the NJB has: “Then I asked…”
555
James Bejon, “Chapter 7: Beauty and the Beasts,”
6.
Extracted on December 4, 2010 from
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_
556
HALOT, 1892.
557
GeCL97.
558
HALOT, 1999. The Aramaic word that the RSV52
translates different has a different form than the same
word in 7:3b Here it is a Pael participle.
559
HALOT, 1850. The verb is a passive participle.
560
HALOT, 1886.
561
Goldingay, Daniel, 35.
562
The verb is a Haphel participle. The same verb is
used in 2:34c, 40b, 44c; 6:24; 7:7, 23.
It may
describe a continuous action here. The REB89 has:
“crunching.”
563
GeCL97; BFrCL88.
564
HALOT, 1983. The verb is a Peal participle. It may
describe a continuous action. The NRSV89 has:
“stamping.”
565
HALOT, 1989.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
566
Scholar interpret the little horn differently.
The GW is similar.
568
Scholars have debated the exact reference of this
symbol. For those who interpret the fourth beast as
the Roman Empire, this would refer to a future time,
since the Roman Empire was never made up of ten
kingdoms. The ten horns would represent a future ten
kingdom confederation. For those who interpret the
fourth beast as Greece, the ten horns would represent
either contemporaries of Antiochus IV Epiphanes
(Hartman & Di Lella, Daniel, 216-17) or a sequence
of ten kings in the Seleucid dynasty who preceded
Antiochus IV Epiphanies (Lucas, Daniel, 193).
Lucas (Daniel, 193) suggests that it is possible that the
number ten is a round number and not to be taken as
exact.
569
GeCL97.
570
Those who interpret the fourth beast as Greece,
identify the little horn as Antiochus IV Epiphanes.
Those who interpret the fourth beast as the Roman
Empire, identify the little horn as a future Antichrist
who would persecute the church. This seems to
correspond with what Paul teaches in 2 Thessalonians
2:3-9 and what John wrote in Revelation 13:3-15;
17:9f. Those who follow this view interpret the little
horn in this chapter as different from the little horn in
Daniel 8. The little horn in Daniel 8 refers more
precisely to Antiochus IV Epiphanes.
571
Longman, Daniel, 189.
572
BFrCL88.
573
HALOT, 1932.
574
Scholars do not agree about who these three kings
represent. Those who believe the fourth beast is the
Roman empire, usually interpret these three kings as
members of the ten king federation.
Those who
interpret the fourth beast as referring to Greece, have
identified the kings differently.
For example,
Goldingay (Daniel, 180) and Collins (Daniel, 321)
identify the three kings as Seleucus IV and his two
sons. Lucas (Daniel, 193) notes that there is no
evidence that links Antiochus IV with the
assassination of Seleucus IV.
575
Bejon interprets the phrase “this horn” as going
with the previous clause: “- concerning that horn in
particular because….” He interprets the waw as
epexegetical and the waw as introducing a reason. See
James Bejon, “Chapter 7: Beauty and the Beasts,” 6.
Extracted
on
December
4,
2010
from
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_
576
LXX, Theodotion.
577
Daniel did not mention this information in 7:8.
578
HALOT, 1873.
579
HALOT, 1976.
580
HALOT, 1869.
581
GeCL97.
582
James Bejon, “Chapter 7: Beauty and the Beasts,”
122.
Extracted on December 4, 2010 from
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_
567
583
129
The phrase is a combination of the peal participle
and the peal perfect first person .
584
HALOT, 1891.
585
The verb has the form of a Peal participle.
586
See the BFrCL88; GeCL97.
587
Collins (Daniel, 276) notes that the consonants can
also be read as an active form. The LXX translates an
active form.
588
HALOT, 1852. See Goldingay, Daniel, 146.
589
See , HALOT, 1948. The standard form
of the title is . This is an Aramaic adjective,
definite and singular which means, “superior,
highest.” It is found in 3:26, 32; 5:18, 21 after the
word God and in 4:14, 21, 22, 29; 7:25a where it
occurs by itself.
590
Caragounis (The Son of Man, 75) identifies this
person as distinct from the Most High God.
Peter Gentry suggests that may be a
deliberate attempt to make a distinction between a
divine figure associated with the saints and yet
distinguished from Yahweh in some way. See Gentry,
“The Son of Man in Daniel 7,” 73.
See also
Hamilton, With the Clouds of Heaven, 151-53.
Hamilton notes that because of the similarity between
the statements in Daniel 7:14 and 7:27, we can be
certain that the Most High referred to with
and associated with the saints in the phrase "saints of
the Most High" is the "one like a son of man.”
591
See the discussion in Collins, Daniel, 312.
592
Goldingay (Daniel, 142) who also cites Calvin
and Lacocque.
593
James Bejon, “Chapter 7: Beauty and the Beasts,”
123,
Extracted on December 4, 2010 from
https://www.academia.edu/15234847/Commentary_O
n_Daniel_Chapter_7_7.1-28_
594
Some modern versions interpret the connector
differently. The CEV95 begins this clause with the
connector “because.” The NJPS85 has: “for…”
595
HALOT, 1866. Collins (Daniel, 319) explains: “the
idea is that they will have strong, secure hold of their
dominion.”
596
HALOT, 1878.
597
The Notes here differs with The TH on Daniel and
HALOT. The TH on Daniel interprets this word here
as “royal power.” HALOT interprets it that same way
both here and in 2:37b, 44; 4:31, 36; 5:18: 5:31; 7:14a,
18, 27a.
598
TH on Daniel.
599
TOB, La Nouvelle Version Segond Révisée.
600
BFrCL88.
601
The verb is a Peal participle.
It may have a
continuous action here. For example, the REB89 has:
“devouring.”
602
HALOT, 1849.
603
BFrCL88.
604
TOB.
605
GeCL97. The NJPS85 has: “from that kingdom
ten kings will arise.” See also the NET.
606
See the discussion by Collins, Daniel, 320. Some
scholars believe that it was a ten king confederation.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
See Hartman and DiLella, Daniel, 216-17; Renald
Showers, The Most High God, 85. The majority of
modern scholars think that the kings succeeded each
other. The BFrCL88 has: “represent ten kings who
will succeed each other at the head of this kingdom.”
For those who interpret the fourth beast as Greece,
some take the ten kings as a mixture of Ptolemies and
Seleucids. Collins (Daniel, 320) notes that the
majority interpret the ten kings as those who belong to
the Seleucid empire. Collins identifies seven of the
ten as: Seleucus I; Antiochus I, II; Seleucus II, III;
Antiochus III; Seleucus IV. However, he admits that
there is no consensus as to the last three.
607
GeCL97.
608
The BFrCL88 has: “who will succeed each
other as the head of that kingdom.”
609
BFrCL88.
610
Some who interpret the fourth beast as the Roman
empire identify the little horn as a future AntiChrist.
See Showers, The Most High God¸ 77. Those who
interpret the fourth beast as Greece, interpret the little
horn as Antiochus IV Epiphanes. Following this view
are Lucas, Collins and Goldingay, among others.
611
The NLT96 has “who.”
612
See also the BFrCL88.
613
HALOT, 2001.
614
The TH on Daniel interprets these to be three of
the ten kings mentioned earlier. Collins (Daniel, 321)
who takes the fourth beast as Greece, considers that
these were Seleucus IV and his sons Antiochus and
Demetrius.
615
BFrCL88.
616
HALOT, 1962.
617
The compound preposition is with the sense
“against” (HALOT, 5, 1963).
618
GeCL97.
619
There seems to be a deliberate attempt to make a
distinction between a divine figure associated with the
saints and Yahweh. See Gentry, “The Son of Man in
Daniel 7,” 73. The other word that the RSV52
translates “Most High” here is . The Notes
usually translates this “Most High God.” See HALOT,
1948. is an Aramaic adjective. It is definite
and singular and means, “superior, highest.”
It is
found in 3:26, 32; 5:18, 21 after the word God and in
4:14, 21, 22, 29; 7:25a by itself.
The other title is
. The Notes translates this as “Most High” or
“Highest One.” See HALOT, 1948. It comes from the
Hebrew word for “highest” with an Aramaic plural
ending.
620
HALOT, 1835.
621
Baldwin, Daniel, 146.
622
Peter Gentry suggests that there may be a
deliberate attempt to make a distinction between a
divine figure associated with the saints and yet
distinguished from Yahweh in some way. See Gentry,
“The Son of Man in Daniel 7,” 73. See also Hamilton,
With the Clouds of Heaven, 151-53. Hamilton notes
that because of the similarity between the statements
in Daniel 7:14 and 7:27, we can be certain that the
Most High referred to with and associated
130
with the saints in the phrase "saints of the Most High"
is the "one like a son of man.”
623
HALOT, 1937.
624
HALOT, 1866.
625
BFrCL88.
626
HALOT, 1866; Baldwin, Daniel, 146.
627
HALOT (1856) notes that it can refer to a royal
command, state legislation or religious law. HALOT
interprets it in this context to refer to the Torah.
628
BFrCL88.
629
HALOT, 1856.
630
Those who interpret this term to mean “religious
law” or Mosaic law often consider this to refer to the
persecution that Antiochus IV Epiphanes directed at
the Jews in the 2nd century B.C.
631
HALOT (1888) has: “might, power.”
632
HALOT, 1943.
633
BFrCL88; La Bible du Semeur.
634
The NET note argues that it should be regarded as
a dual form.
“The Masoretes may have been
influenced by the fact that in late Aramaic (and
Syriac) dual forms fall out of use.” See also the note
by Goldingay, Daniel, 146, 25d.
635
HALOT, 1944; BFrCL88. Scholars differ in how
they interpret the three and a half years.. Those who
think that the fourth beast refers to Greece, think this
period refers to the desecration of the temple from
December 6, 167 to December 14th 164 B.C. See
Collins, Daniel, 322 This would have actually been a
period of three years and eight days. Lucas (Daniel,
194) considers the number as symbolic. He argues
that since it is half of the perfect number, seven, it
would denote a short period of evil.
636
Peter Gentry, Kingdom Through Covenant, 2d
edition, 634-36.
637
Ibid. 635.
638
Lucas, Daniel, 165.
639
The TN on Daniel.
640
GeCL97.
641
HALOT (1852) lists “judgment”, “justice” as well
as other possibilities.
642
HALOT (1852) suggests that it means a judicial
assembly. See also 7:10, 22.
643
La Nouvelle Version Segond, GeCL97
644
See also BFrCL88; La Bible du Semeur.
645
See the TOB.
646
Daniel 7:12, 14 (3x), 26, 27).
647
La Bible du Semeur.
648
BFrCL88; La Bible du Semeur; TOB.
649
HALOT, 1997. The verb is a Haphal infinitive.
Collins (Daniel) 276 has: “for destruction.”
650
See , HALOT, 1938.
651
HALOT, 1806. The verb is a Haphal infinitive.
Collins (Daniel, 276) has: “for perdition.”
652
See HALOT, 1938.
653
BFrCL88.
654
HALOT interprets this verse and verse 44 this way.
Also 4:28, 33a; 5:18: 6:1; 7:14a, 18, 22, 27a.
655
GeCL98; La Bible du Semeur; BFCL88.
656
HALOT lists Daniel 2:39, 42, 44; 3:33: 4:18c, 26b,
36b; 5:7, 11, 16, 26, 28f; 6:2, 4f, 8, 27.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
657
658
GeCL97.
He was crowned king (CEV95).
The Aramaic word that the RSV52 translates
greatness See HALOT, 1977. It occurs at
4:22c, 36f; 5:18; 7:27.
660
See HALOT, 1889.
661
Theodotion and the Old Latin. See Peter Gentry,
“The Son of Man in Daniel 7,” 72. Gentry argues that
this is the harder and preferred text.
662
Ibid.
663
The problem with this view is why use this term
here when it has the same meaning as in 7:18, 22?
664
Lucas, Daniel, 163. Lucas explains that this would
make this phrase focus on the humans who are
“among the holy ones.” Referring to Daniel 12:1, 7
and 1QM 10:10, Lucas identifies these people as Jews.
665
GeCL97.
666
Peter J. Gentry, ‘The Meaning of Holy’ in the Old
Testament, Bib Sac 170: 680 (Oct 2013):400-417.
667
This is the traditional Christian view of the phrase.
Baldwin (Daniel, 152) notes three points in its favor:
(1) The word in 7:27 is more often used to refer
to Israel as the holy people; (2) The author does use
the word “angels” in Daniel 8:13. He could have used
it here if he had wanted to be clear; (3) Finally, these
beings suffer and are defeated (7:21, 25) which does
not seem to correspond to angels. Vern Poythress
argues that this term can also refer to human beings as
well as angels in the O.T. See V.S. Poythress, “The
Holy Ones of the Most High in Daniel vii,” VT 26
(1976): 208-13. See for example, Psalms 34:10.
668
This is the traditional Jewish view of the phrase.
See also the TH on Daniel; HALOT, 1966, 1948.
669
This is most popular view today. See John J.
Collins, Daniel, 313-17; Lucas, Daniel, 191-92. In
Aramaic and in the Dead Sea Scrolls and elsewhere in
Daniel (4:13; 8:13) the phrase refers to angels.
Baldwin (Daniel, 152) notes three points that
commentators usually use to support the view that it
refers to angels: (1) In the Old Testament, the phrase
“holy ones” is usually used to refer to angels and not
men. (2) Secondly, the one who is like a son of man,
in 7:13, is a superhuman figure so those associated
with him must also be superhuman, (3) The word
translated “people” in 7:27 can mean “host.”
670
Longman, Daniel, 189; Lucas, Daniel, 192. Lucas
explains that in Daniel 10-12 things on earth have an
heavenly counterpart. He concludes that it may be
“misguided to make a sharp distinction between
‘angelic’ and ‘human’ in the referent of the imagery in
the vision.”
671
That one is . The title is used in
7:18a, 22, 25b, 27.
672
Peter Gentry suggests that it is a deliberate attempt
to make a distinction between a divine figure
associated with the saints and yet perhaps
distinguished from Yahweh in some way.”
See
Gentry, “The Son of Man in Daniel 7,” 73. See also
Hamilton, With the Clouds of Heaven, 151-53.
Hamilton notes that because of the similarity between
659
131
the statements in Daniel 7:14 and 7:27, we can be
certain that the Most High referred to with
and associated with the saints in the phrase "saints of
the Most High" is the "one like a son of man.”
Hamilton further explains, “By using these
distinct forms for ‘Most High’ consistently, Daniel
identified both the Ancient of Days and the one like a
son of man as the Most High, even as he distinguished
them from one another. In this passage, Daniel
communicates that the one like a son of man will be
enthroned alongside the Ancient of Days, that he
comes with clouds as Yahweh does elsewhere (e.g.
Pss 18:10; 97:2; 104:3, etc.) that he receives service
and worship – described with terms only elsewhere
used for describing obeisance done for deity… and
that he will receive the everlasting kingdom which
shall not pass away, which is exactly how God’s
kingdom is described. The Ancient of Days is
described as Most High with one term, while the one
like a son of man is described as Most High with
another. And the term used to describe the one like a
son of man as Most High is always used in the phrase
‘saints of the Most High’, apparently because the
Psalm 8:5 son of man who receives dominion over the
beasts, the Psalm 110:1 Lord of David who sits at
Yahweh’s right hand, will be king over the saints,
their representative who is somehow both identified
with and distinguished from the Ancient of Days, even
as he is both a descendant of David and a divine
figure.” (pp. 152-53)
673
The Aramaic word for people is grammatically
masculine singular, but plural in meaning.
674
Collins, Daniel, 322.
675
Gentry, “The Son of Man in Daniel 7,” 72.
676
Peter Gentry, “The Son of Man in Daniel 7,” 70.
677
Ibid., 71.
678
Ibid., 72.
679
Ibid.
680
Ibid.
681
Ibid., 71.
682
Ibid., 73.
683
Ibid., 72.
684
The Aramaic verb is . It occurs in 3:12, 14,
17, 18, 28; 6:17, 21; 7:14, 27. Gentry (“The Son of
Man in Daniel 7,” 72-73) notes that outside of Daniel
7 it always refers to the worship of divinity. Hamilton
(With the Clouds of Heaven, 152) explains that “this is
language used elsewhere in Daniel to refer to the kind
of service one renders to what one worships …. And it
is more probable that such service would be rendered
to the Most High than to the people.”
685
BFrCL88; NVSR,
686
GeCL97.
687
Peter Gentry (“The Son of Man in Daniel 7,” 72)
notes that the Hebrew word obey () together with
“serve” () have the same meaning as
See for example Joshua 24:24.
688
See HALOT, 1915.
689
HALOT, 1896.
690
HALOT (1832-33) cites Daniel 4:5b, 19b; 5:6, 10;
7:15, 28.
Consultant Notes on Daniel
691
TOB.
GeCL97.
693
The Aramaic phrase is literally, “my brightness
was changing on me.”
694
Literally the verb reads: “changed upon him”
Lucas (Daniel, 121) mentions that the suffix may be
the result of haplography or “an anomalous indirect
object” (GKC 117x).
695
The verb is an imperfect. The NET translates it:
“was changing.”
696
BFrCL88
697
GeCL97.
698
BFrCL88, TOB, La Bible du Semeur.
699
BFrCL88.
692
132
Related papers
Les tournants herméneutiques de Paul Ricœur
Études Ricoeuriennes / Ricoeur Studies
The Fear of the Lord is Wisdom? A Consideration of Job 28 as a Sarcastic Response to the Wisdom Tradition.
Hebrew Union College Annual, 2024
CFA 1st PHILAWSON Workshop. Contemporary Views on Social Ontology and Philosophy of Law (Milan 2024)
The Gondola: a boat to respond to the history, and the morpho-dynamics of the Venice Lagoon
MEDITERRANEE online, 2022
La Loma Santibáñez de la Peña. Carne y subsistencia durante el asedio romano.
Los Ojos de la Tierra, 2024
A Contemporary Systematic Review on Meta-heuristic Optimization Algorithms with Their MATLAB and Python Code Reference
Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 2023
Lithium's Bipolar Transitions
Lithium: Towards a Theory of Bipolar Transitions, 2021
Giuliano Boccali, Cinzia Pieruccini, Induismo
I Dizionari delle Religioni, Electa, Milano 2008.
Adverse Reactions to Medications: Concept Analysis and Development of a New Risk Nursing Diagnosis
International journal of nursing knowledge, 2020
Diffusion of Hydrogen in the TRIP 800 Steel
Procedia Materials Science, 2016
Michèle CASTELLENGO : Ecoute musicale et acoustique. Paris : Eyrolles, 2015
Cahiers d’ethnomusicologie. Anciennement Cahiers de musiques traditionnelles, 2016
Introduction to the special issue on machine law
Artificial Intelligence and Law, 2017
Avaliação da diversidade genética de fungos micorrízicos arbusculares em três estádios de estabilização de dunas
Revista Brasileira De Ciencia Do Solo, 2002
Nos bastidores de Hollywood<A NAME="suptitulo"></A>
Cadernos Pagu, 2003
Cassava shoot infestation by larvae of Neosilba perezi (Romero & Ruppell) (Diptera: Lonchaeidae) in São Paulo State, Brazil
Neotropical Entomology, 2011
Between coercion and protection. Locationes censoriae in the times of the Roman Republic
Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies, 2024
Should Patients with Implanted Left Ventricular Assist Devices Be Allowed to Use Elective Unos 1A Time?
Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2011