Book of Daniel

Scholars have commonly located the source of Paul’s analogy for the resurrection body in 1 Cor 15:39–49 in the enumerated creatures of Genesis 1. Some interpreters have suggested Sir 43:1–10 lies behind the reference to the variegated glory of the celestial bodies mentioned in 1 Cor 15:41. Paul seems to list each of the respective terrestrial creatures and their bodies in a hierarchical order, as he does with the celestial bodies, relating the resurrection body to the later. Rather than the eschatological egalitarianism presumed in some attempts to appropriate Pauline eschatology for theological purposes, this text suggests that Paul envisioned the imminent resurrection of the dead would result in a kind of celestial hierarchicalism, a point often overlooked by interpreters. In this paper, I will argue for an alternative source for the celestial hierarchicalism apparent in the formulation of Paul’s resurrection mythos in 1 Cor 15:41, namely, an apocalyptic reception of Exodus tradition rooted in the hierarchical ascent of the cosmic mountain in Exodus 24 and its later reception. As is the case for other apocalypticists before, contemporary with, and after Paul, this paper will provide further evidence that Paul's own particular construal of Jewish eschatological mythoi, while recognizable, would place him squarely alongside other Jewish contemporaries who operate at the fringes of their own tradition in the wider ancient Mediterranean religious landscape.

Who, or what, is the beast of Revelation? We cannot know the Mark of the Beast or any other details until we trace the history of kingdoms, both spiritual and earthly.

The symbols of Revelation 13 and Revelation 17 give us enough information to compare with other passages like Daniel so we can find the true meaning of the beast.

We will find that the end-time beast can be considered as the devil's spiritual kingdom, or the driving force behind religio-political systems on earth.

How  Christian Zionism changes the New Covenant, with a focus on how Bible revisions since the 1537 Matthew Bible have allowed Zionist doctrine to be read into the Scriptures, and conversely have destroyed the Scripture's ability to refute Zionism. 

Looks at:
(1) How modern revisions to the New Testament about tribute payments to Rome have destroyed Jesus’ teaching that his kingdom is spiritual.
(2) How the Matthew Bible treatment of Isaiah’s prophecy of the New Covenant temple differs from John MacArthur’s Zionist treatment in his study Bible.
(3) How rebuilding the temple may bring the curse of Jericho on the builders.
(4) How Daniel 9, the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem, has been changed to allow the idea that the city and temple might be rebuilt.
(5) How a modern revision to the book of Revelation suggests that time will continue after Jesus’ second coming, thus enabling the concept of a future millennium.

In the biblical theophanies of Isaiah 6 and Daniel 3, divine condescension and human ascent constitute reciprocal ecstatic moves towards a divine–human encounter. The christological interpretation, widespread in early Christian reception history, further discerns in Isaiah 6 and Daniel 3 an anticipation of the radical condescension of the Logos-made-human and, conversely, an anticipation of the deifying ascent of humanity in Christ. Finally, the early Christian reading of Isaiah 6 and Daniel 3 as ‘christophanies’ – that is, as manifestations of the Logos-to-be-incarnate – also allows us a glimpse into the performative aspect and experiential claims of early Christian exegesis, broadly construed to also incorporate hymnography, iconography and ritual.

Taken at face value, the book of Daniel in the HB seems to occupy a position outside the narrow confines often set in academic (and other) contexts that structure our knowledge, experience and, ultimately, the world we live in. Therefore, OT scholars are debating how this book came to be reckoned among the prophets, while in the HB, it appears in what is traditionally referred to as the writings. Furthermore, the notion of producing a unified text in more than one language (i.e. Hebrew and Aramaic) falls outside the formal, yet unwritten, expectations for literature, both modern and ancient. When one considers the content of the book, inter alia the exilic setting chosen for the book, the position(s) occupied by the main character(s) in the narratives, as well as the symbolic worlds created in the visions, an impression of a text outside, or at least at the border of, expected literary confines is gained. In this article, the concept of liminality will be applied to " explore ... the interpretive power, the hermeneutical reach of the concept " in the book of Daniel (see Gustavo Pérez Firmat, Literature and Liminality, 1986).

The author analyses the evolution of the idea of magic reflected in the decrees of Christian Roman Emperors included in the Theodosian Code. He describes the place of the chapter De maleficis in the structure of Book IX of the Theodosian Code and analyses its constitutions. Special attention is paid to the possible sources of the norms described and to the connection between the evolution of Christianity and the tightening of anti-magic legislation.
Article is written on Russian

James Hamilton, associate professor of biblical theology at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary as well as preaching pastor at Kenwood Baptist Church, is well-qualified to write a biblical theology of Daniel. His commentary on Revelation was published in the Preaching the Word commentary series. Hamilton contributed a short introduction to Biblical Theology (What Is Biblical Theology?: A Guide to the Bible’s Story, Symbolism, and Patterns, Crossway, 2014). The New Studies in Biblical Theology series has contributed many studies on both the Old and New Testament seeking to study particular elements of Biblical Theology from a canonical or theological perspective. Perhaps what is unique about this volume is the focus is primarily on the book of Daniel. There are a number of elements of Hamilton’s book attempt to trace broader themes of Biblical theology. For example Hamilton seeks to read the typologies from the book of Daniel through the Second Temple Period and the New Testament, especially the book of Revelation.

The article has two main focuses – first, it follows the most significant and important Antichrist myth researches, and secondly, the Greek tradition of De Christo et Antichristo by Hippolytus of Rome and the Slavonic versions of the text. The Slavonic witnesses are examined according to their omissions, additions, grammatical and morphological variations, and also some of the changes in the Bible quotations are highlighted. This work does not pretend to present new information on the Greek sources but to demonstrate how important the Slavonic translation is to the interpretation of the Greek original. The most interesting results are pointed out in the relation with the Greek text itself, where the proximity between the Greek fragment of Meteora Monastery 573 and the Slavonic tradition is presented.

4Q390 is a document akin to but not identical with Apocryphon of Jeremiah C. It presents the exilic and postexilic era of history of Israel as a period of 70 x 7 = 70 + 7 x 49 + 70 + 7 years of forced theocracy. 4Q390 may partially account for the rise of Messianic expectations in Israel ca. 200-175 B.C. and ca. 103-96 B.C.

In this volume, John Calvin provides an engaging commentary on the last 6 chapters of Daniel. Regarded as one of the Reformation's best interpreters of scripture, Calvin is an apt commentator. In particular, he frequently offers his own translations of a passage, explaining the subtleties and nuances of his translation. He has a penchant for incorporating keen pastoral insight into the text as well. He always interacts with other theologians, commentators, and portions of the Bible when interpreting a particular passage. This volume also contains extensive, informative notes from the editor. Calvin's Commentary on Daniel should not be ignored.

The beasts from Revelation 13 are an extension of the beasts in Daniel 7. Any interpretation of Revelation 13 should be done in relationship with Daniel 7. The beast from the sea in Revelation 13 is the fourth beast from the sea of Daniel 7. Which is the Roman Empire.
The descriptions from Revelation 13 as well as Daniel 7 neatly fit the Roman Empire with Titus being the eleventh king who destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in the year 70 in the middle of the 7 year first Judeo-Roman war.
Nevertheless a totally preterist interpretation of all of Revelation is not appropriate either.
The repeated '3.5 times' from Daniel that also appears in Revelation 12 can be seen as the entire period that Judah did not exist as a nation anymore and lasted from the year 70 to 1948.
The resurrected empire of Revelation 17 that was allowed to reign for just an hour may have been the Third Reich from Hitler.

Second Baruch is a Jewish apocalypse written in the wake of the Roman sacking of the Jerusalem temple. This essay examines how deliberately Second Baruch uses the biblical sapiential tradition and closely connects it with the apocalyptic tradition in Daniel. Particularly, Second Baruch eschatologizes the idea of elusive wisdom in Job 28 against the backdrop of the apocalyptic concept of two-group in Daniel 11-12. To deal with the theological crisis Judaism behind Second Baruch faced, Second Baruch integrates the sacred past that Scripture enshrined with the apocalyptic future that Second Baruch advocates.

The biblical books of Daniel and Revelation are rich in content and message. These two prophetic books have traditionally caught the attention of the most avid readers and students of the Scriptures. Given the relevance of Daniel and Revelation to the end time, the correct interpretation of these books should be of the utmost importance to every student of God's Word. This need takes on special relevance in modern times, when so many different interpretations of the Bible's prophecies have emerged. That is why this work discusses issues such as (1) the basic presuppositions of the thought and interpretation of Daniel and Revelation, (2) the methods of prophetic interpretation, (3) the "day-year" principle, (4) the recapitulation principle and the importance of Daniel and Revelation for today as a way to contribute a
Los libros bíblicos de Daniel y Apocalipsis son ricos en contenido y mensaje. Estos dos libros proféticos tradicionalmente han llamado la atención de los más ávidos lectores y estudiosos de las Escrituras. Dada la relevancia de Daniel y Apocalipsis para el tiempo del fin, la correcta interpretación de estos libros debiera ser de la mayor importancia para todo estudioso de la Palabra de Dios. Esta necesidad cobra especial relevancia en tiempos modernos, cuando han surgido tantas interpretaciones diferentes sobre las profecías de la Biblia. Por eso en esta obra se discuten temas tales como (1) las presuposiciones básicas del pensamiento y la interpretación de Daniel y Apocalipsis, (2) los métodos de interpretación profética, (3) el principio "día por año", (4) el principio de recapitulación y la importancia de Daniel y Apocalipsis para hoy.

The aim of this study is to single out possible intertextual connections between the Song of Hannah in the Targums to the Prophets and the Aramaic section of the Book of Daniel. As such, the study highlights significant linguistic parallels, structural correspondences and thematic links which connect both compositions. Based on the evidences that have been presented, the study concludes that the Song of Hannah in the Targums to the Prophets reflects a reworked composition in accordance with the apocalyptic genre under the influence of the Aramaic section of Daniel.

The famous baths of two biblical women, Bathsheba and Susanna,
captured the lust of their respective onlookers. Despite what is
not a hint of seductive intent in their stories, many interpreters
have portrayed these two characters as, essentially, “asking
for it.” Feminist scholars have worked to rehabilitate Bathsheba
and Susanna’s reputations. Curiously, though, neither traditional
scholars portraying the characters as femmes fatales nor feminist
interpreters defending them have brought a third biblical bathing
woman, Judith, into the discussion. This paper argues that
Judith is the only one of the three to whom the biblical text actually
does attribute seductive motives. Judith uses the idea that a
bathing woman is an irresistible object of desire to her advantage
and so arranges semipublic baths while she is in an Assyrian military
camp. Using close readings of the three texts and feminist
interpretive strategies, Tamber-Rosenau argues that Judith, unlike
the other two bathing women, choreographs her exposure
for maximum effect. Judith’s baths, unlike those of Bathsheba
and Susanna, are a calculated part of a larger seduction routine.

This is a presentation I gave in October, 2018.  There is a man on Nebuchadnezzar's Prism named Ea-Dayyan.  By comparing 6 identifiable characteristics between him and the Daniel of Bible, I conclude that Ea-Dayyan is the Daniel of the Bible, listed as his Hebrew name of Daniel.  A formal paper will follow with more discussion.  Here is the outline form.

This is my own journey of how God led me to understand we are living in the time of the seven seals of Revelation 6-8, and the 1290 days of Daniel 12:11. Hopefully, by the end of this presentation, you will think so, too.
News articles are current through August 13, 2020.

I modi con cui riprese di parti testuali del libro di Daniele sono incastonate nella Commedia mostrano che Dante non si limita a riutilizzare un apparato di immagini dal forte impatto visuale (celeberrima quella della statua, che diviene in Dante il Veglio di Creta). Ogni ripresa della fonte biblica presuppone infatti che il lettore abbia in mente il contesto dal quale è tratta sebbene Dante non lo riporti. Non solo: l’angelologia e le visioni di Daniele divengono oggetto di riuso
da parte del sommo poeta, ma la figura stessa del profeta Daniele, testimone nel­l’esilio e di tempi di sofferenza, diviene un modello attraverso il quale Dante autore rilegge il senso del Dante personaggio della Commedia. Così non solo il testo di Daniele fornisce immagini di visioni per Dante, ma la figura stessa del profeta rischiara i caratteri del profetismo dantesco.

This article assesses the importance of the biblical book of Daniel in the first four Islamic centuries, focusing in particular on the legendary materials contained in Daniel 1-6. The article is divided into three sections. In the first section the treatments of Daniel 1-6 in Isrāʾīliyyāt works are examined, and it is shown that summaries of Daniel 1-6 in these works display evidence of oral transmission. Additionally, it is shown that some authors' familiarity with Daniel legends led them to insert this character into "biblical" narratives that do not otherwise relate to him. In the second section it is argued that Daniel's exploits were so widely known that they served as a sort of yardstick for judging the relative importance of some other "heroic" figures who are described in classical Islamic sources. In the third section it is postulated that the introductory sections of Ibn Hishām's Sīra consciously relate stories with Daniel-ic associations in order to bring the Sīra into line with the Christian Gospels.

The Aramaic chapters (2–7) of Daniel comprise its conceptual, generic and traditiona-historical core. This paper presents a fresh interpretation of their two parts (chs. 2–6 + 7) with a view to confirmation of a working hypothesis for a new approach to the genre apocalypse. The earliest exemplars of the genre articulate and promulgate a particular epistemology, grounded in two phenomena: firstly, the belief that God created humanity to be his ṣelem and demut (Gen 1:26–28, cf. 2:7–25) and, secondly, Israel’s covenant institutions, especially its temple, personnel and liturgy that provide, in representative miniature, a chaos-free and perfected heaven and earth. These two—a personal ontology and cultic cosmology—grant to individuals (qua ṣelem ʾelōhim) direct and intimate contact with divine and heavenly realities, in a way both comparable to but different from pagan attempts to secure divine presence and revelation.
In Daniel 2–7 a major theme is the nature of divine presence that makes genuine revelation possible. This is first signalled in 2:11 when the Chaldean diviners’ words of protestation condemn their own claims to be able to access divine knowledge. The stories that follow claim that two kinds of divine “dwelling with flesh” are possible for God’s people. In chapters 2–6 God dwells with covenant faithful Israelites, exemplified by Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. Daniel is filled with the divine spirit (cf. Gen 2:7) and his friends’ covenant faithful character exemplifies a fulfilment of the original intention for humanity set out in Gen 1:26–28. Three aspects of that passage are explored in the stories of Dan 2–6, in ways that anticipate the characterization of the “one like a son of man” and “the holy ones” in 7:13–27. In chapters 2, 4 and 6 there is royal rule (cf. Dan 7:14). There is worship of Daniel (2:46) and of the man figure (7:14) that makes best sense as narrative exegesis of what it means that humanity was created to be God’s living image idol (Gen 1:26–28). And thirdly, in the exaltation of Daniel and his friends, there is a democratization of kingship, as in Genesis (cf. 7:27). This thoroughgoing debt to Gen 1–3 explains the feature of Dan 2–7 that sets it apart generically. Spirit-filled Israelites have direct access to the kind of divine revelation which pagans sought, unsuccessfully, through divination because the function, in effect, as God’s living cult statues.
All this prepares for the climactic chapter, where God comes to dwell, on earth, in the Jerusalem temple (7:9–27, cf. 2:11). The chapter assumes a familiar (non-dualistic) Israelite and ancient Near Eastern temple cosmology. None of the standard explanations of the “one like a son of man” figure (Dan 7:13–14) is without serious problems. Those problems are avoided and all that can be said about the “one like a son of man” is best explained if he is a new high priest coming to God in clouds of (heavenly) incense (cf. Lev 16). He sums up, in his representative office, what has been said about the Israelites in chs. 2–6 (cf. 7:27). His divine, human and royal (and angelic?) character fits what we now know of contemporary beliefs about Israel’s high priestly office (cf. esp. Ben Sira 50). The holy ones (vv. 18, 22 …) are priests (and Levites?) and there are striking linguistic connections between 7:14–27 and portions of the Aramaic Levi Document. The primary burden of Daniel 7 is a particular (messianic) political theology, not a transcendent eschatology.
Read this way, Daniel 2–7 promulgates a particular way of knowing and acting, grounded in Israel’s scriptures’ distinctive experience of, or vision for, what it means to be human. That vision was nurtured by temple liturgy and cosmology.

Daniel 9:24 is fraught with puzzling language, particularly the meaning of the “seventy-sevens” (24a). Rather than add to the relevant commentaries, this paper approaches the phrase in light of the heptadic language we find in select Qumran sources. Jubilees, 1 Enoch and related scrolls – texts orbiting the final shaping of the book of Daniel – portray these heptadic structures as, primarily, theological expressions, with chronology either set in the background or absent altogether. I suggest this context casts the seventy-sevens in a new light, wherein it serves a mainly theological function instead of a rigid, temporal one. Beginning with a brief examination of each major parabiblical source, we will consider two theological implications that come as a result of these literary comparisons: first, Daniel’s seventy-sevens may need to be initially interpreted as a theological image; second, the image likely paints a picture of exile-restoration in its fullness, spanning all epochs, not just the Seleucid-Hasmonean crises. The conclusion notes how such literary and theological moves may also connote a deliberate shaping of the text to include subsequent, interpretive communities, such as Qumran and its sects.

God did not intend to establish His kingdom at the end of the seventy weeks, as many interpreters believe. Innumerable theologians believe that because of the sins of the people and the lack of faithfulness of God's people to the Covenant, God had to change His plans and to come up with something else. Instead, the proposal of this investigator is that He intended to allow other nations to rule, despite the faithfulness or unfaithfulness of His people before establishing an everlasting kingdom of peace and justice.
Also, it clearly presents Daniel as the author of the whole book. If this hypothesis is accepted, the theories that teach that the second part of Daniel (7-12) was written by a pseudo-Daniel around the 2nd century B.C. will have no validity at all, and Daniel, alone was the only writer of the book.
Also, the date for the writing of the whole book is between the 1st-3rd of Cyrus, King of Persia (Daniel 1:21; 10:1). This alone invalidates the idea of 13 years between Daniel 8 and 9, and places both chapters within the same time frame that corresponds with the year in which Belshazzar died (Daniel 5).

The capture of Babylon by a coalition of forces under the leadership of Cyrus the Great is written about, as a prophecy, in the biblical books of Isaiah and Jeremiah. In these books, priority in the conquest is not given to Persia, as might be expected, but to Media. This is also consistent with the Book of Daniel, in which the handwriting on the wall at Belshazzar’s feast mentions the Medes before the Persians. Also in the Book of Daniel, a Mede is named as receiving the kingdom after the slaying of Belshazzar.
    This emphasis on the Medes over the Persians in the Bible is consistent with the Harran Stela, commissioned by Babylon’s king Nabonidus just three years or less before the fall of Babylon in 539 BC. The Stela names the Medes as a principal enemy, without mentioning the Persians because Nabonidus considered them as under the suzerainty of the Medes at the time.
    The present article examines these issues, focusing on how they relate to the existence or non-existence of the Median king at the time, Cyaxares II. This Cyaxares is presented as a major actor in the history of the time in Xenophon’s Cyropaedia, but the consensus of modern historians is that he is entirely fictitious, the invention of Xenophon. The reasoning behind the consensus view is explained, and the reasons favoring the alternative view—that Cyaxares was a real person—are given, along with the insights that the alternative view offers in interpreting some difficult passages in the Book of Daniel.

Abstract:  There is a man named Innin-šar-usur in the archives of Erech that dates to the time of Nebuchadnezzar and Nabonidus.  The “INNIN” part of his name is The goddess of Uruk, who was known by many names in the Neo-Babylonian times.  When one substitutes one of her names, “Belti-*’,  for “INNIN”, his name then becomes Belteshazzar, which is the name Daniel was given when he got to Babylon .  Innin-šar-usur shares a grandfather with a person who can be shown to be Shadrach, one of Daniel’s known friends , and he lived in the right time period  and place to be the Daniel of the Bible.  There is no other contradictory information known about this man that prevents him from being Daniel, and he has four positive, identifying characteristics that match Daniel.  Therefore, until other information proves otherwise, this man could be the Daniel of the Bible, recorded as his Babylonian name of Belteshazzar.