Christian Biblical Reflections.31

Christian Biblical Reflections.31. (Incomplete & Tentative)
(Not wishing to delay any further, and still several months from completing the remaining Selections & the writing the Reflections on the whole, I share it with others who might have interest in this Key prophetic Book. The original in PDF of the Selections of Calvin’s & Newton’s & Lowth’s are from very old editions which typefaces that has caused considerable labor to edit. These 4 Selections are of great importance to the later & modern interpreters & commentators of the Book. The Analysis & Digest was done months ago; the Chronology is incomplete, and to be completed when the Reflections are written. The Selections to be added are from the 19th-21st centuries, which all are dependent on these earlier Selections that are herein given. If the Lord permits, the 12 Minor Prophets, being an Appendix to Daniel & the 3 Major Prophets, will follow. As in Ezekiel I’ve had to change my style in reflecting on this Book. mjm.) The PDF is attached. The link to my One Drive files are:
https://1drv.ms/b/s!AgcwUEJ0moRUhNUq0AKV13E9Ek3uNQ?e=AzqhtR
https://1drv.ms/w/s!AgcwUEJ0moRUhNUolXrUk8DRG-3fXQ?e=VlNwPd
https://1drv.ms/u/s!AgcwUEJ0moRUhNUukOnf3cpuJoWCJQ?e=DKFFqE (CBR4-5.Daniel)
https://1drv.ms/u/s!AgcwUEJ0moRUhNUr33cfjhqfqsRETA?e=vx4ZcR (CBR.PublicFolder)
CBR files in PDF & Word:
https://1drv.ms/u/s!AgcwUEJ0moRUg_Ua3IHBwOxi9NWARA?e=2b3BsD
Here is the link to my Internet Archive.org library page for those interested:
https://archive.org/details/@mikemjm

 

CBR.4-5.Dan,12MinProph.Hos-Mal..Dec20.2019.ChristBibReflect.v2.mjmselim.

CHAPTER V
Part V: DANIEL, & TWELVE MINOR PROPHETS: HOSEA-MALACHI.
Part V: DANIEL-MALACHI: Prophetical Books: Daniel &
Twelve: Minor-Smaller-Shorter Prophets.

BOOK OF DANIEL: Prophet-Ruler.

In the 3rd year of King Jehoiakim of Judah, King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon besieged it. The ‘Lord’ (Adonai, as a substitute for Yehowah, Jehovah, Yah) gave King Jehoiakim into his hand, with some of the vessels of ‘God’s’ House (Beth-haElohim, House of the God); who carried them to the Land of Shinar (Babylonia: southeastern Mesopotamia between the Tigris & Euphrates Rivers (modern southern Iraq from around Baghdad to the Persian Gulf)) to his ‘god’s’ (elohim) house: also he took the vessels into the treasure-house of his ‘god’ (elohim). The King told Ashpenaz the Master (Rab as in Rabbi; lord, master, great-one, chief, teacher) of his eunuchs, to select of the Israelites, of the Royal-seed & Nobles, attractive & healthy youths, intelligent, educated, experienced, & scholarly, suitable to stand in the King’s Palace (his Court); to teach them the learning & language of the Chaldeans (Kassedim of Dim, as in Ur of the Chaldees of Chaldea; ‘l’ is variant pronunciation; historically its roots are not clear, perhaps lost after the Sumerians (southern Mesopotamia) were dominated by the Akkadians (northern Mesopotamia)). {See: Gesenius, RBDB, 1907; also 1906 abridged: “n.pr. gent, et terr. Kasdim= Chaldeans, Chaldea, (As. (mat) Kaldu, ‘Kaldu’; fr. earlier (Bab.) form [*’Kasdu’]—’s’ before dental becoming ‘l’ ). 1. ‘Chaldeans’: a. people dwelling on lower Euphrates & Tigris; in n.pr.loc. b. esp. people ruled by Nebuchadrezzar; bath-k’ = [daughter of Kasedim, Chaldea] Babylon (in dirge). c. Chaldeans as learned class, skilled in interpretations Dn 2:2. 2. Chaldea, & Chaldea shall be despoiled.”} The King appointed their daily meals from the royal menu, and of his wine, for three years; that they may stand before the King. Among these captives, Jews of Judah, were Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, & Azariah.
(Note: “023: 3rd yr: King Jehoiakim’s reign. He rebels against King of Babylon. Pharaoh Neco defeated (battle at Carchemish). King Nabopolassar dies. King Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem. 024: 4th yr: King Jehoiakim’s reign. 1st yr: King Nebuchad(n,r)ezzar’s reign. 1st yr: 70 Years Captivity Begins. Jeremiah’s Prophecies recorded in a Book. (Jeremiah’s 23rd yr of ministry) (Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah (in their late teens or early twenties) & other Jews taken captive to Babylon) (Daniel @ 20) 025: 5th yr: King Jehoiakim’s reign. 2nd yr: King Nebuchadnezzar’s reign.) 2nd yr of the 70 Years Captivity. (King Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream of Great Image of an Imperial Man; Daniel interprets the Dream of Empires or Kingdoms: Babylon, Medes-Persians, Greeks, & Romans. Daniel made Ruler of Babylon’s Province.) (Ezekiel @ 20.) .”) The Prince of the eunuchs renamed them: Daniel was Belteshazzar; Hananiah was Shadrach; Mishael was Meshach; & Azariah was Abed-nego. Daniel determined not to defile himself with the royal meals or wine: he requested of the Chief of the eunuchs to avoid defilement by abstinence from the royal menu. God (haElohim)favored Daniel to the Head of the eunuchs; he said to Daniel: ‘I fear my Lord, the King, who appointed your meals & drinks: why should he see your faces looking worse than the youths your age? my head would be endangered with the King’. Daniel told the Steward, appointed by the Prince of the eunuchs over the 4 of them: ‘please, test yur servants, 10 days; let us have vegetables or grains with water. Then compare our faces to the youths eating of the royal menu; then decide’. He listened to them, and tested them for 10 days. Afterwards their faces appeared healthier, & more wholesome, than the other youths. So the Steward substituted for them the royal meals & wine for pulse. God (haElohim) gave these 4 youths knowledge & skill in all the learning & wisdom: & Daniel had understanding in visions & dreams. At the end of King’s appointed days, of 3 years, the Prince of the eunuchs led them to stand before Nebuchadnezzar. The King conversed with them; and among all the youths were none like Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, & Azariah: so they continued to stand before the King, in his Court. In all matters of wisdom & understanding that the King inquired of them, he found them 10 times better than the magicians & enchanters (scribes, diviners, astrologers, scholars, experts, sages; conjurer, necromancer) in all his realm. Daniel continued in captivity to 1st year of King Cyrus, at the 70th year of the Babylonian Captivity, and about the time of his death in his 80s.
In the 2nd year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar: Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams; his spirit was troubled & he was sleepless. The King commanded to call the magicians, enchanters, sorcerers, & Chaldeans, to tell him his dreams. They stood before the King: he related, I dreamed, my spirit is troubled to know the dream. The Chaldeans replied to the King in Syriac (Aramaic): ‘King, live forever, tell yur servants the dream, and we’ll reveal the interpretation’. The king told them ‘he’s forgotten it; if they cannot reveal the dream & its interpretation, they’ll be cut in pieces, their houses become dunghill. If they reveal both, they’ll be rewarded & honored’. They answered again as before; he replied that ‘he knows that they are stalling for time, because he doesn’t remember the dream. But if they cannot reveal the dream, there is only one law for them; for they prepared lying & corrupt words to tell him, till the time is changed; so he demands no more delay’. The Chaldeans answered: ‘No man on earth can show the King’s demand, so no king, lord, or ruler, has ever demanded such a thing from magician, enchanter, or Chaldean. The King requires a rare thing, no one can reveal it to the King, except the ‘Gods’ (Elahin, Elohin), whose dwelling is not with flesh’. He was angry & furious, he ordered to destroy all the wise men of Babylon. The decree went forth for the wise men must be slain; they searched for Daniel & his companions to be slain. Daniel wisely asked Arioch, Captain of the King’s Guard, who was executing the King’s order to slay the wise men of Babylon: why is the King’s decree so urgent? Arioch told him. Daniel went & requested a set time to give the interpretation to the King. He returned home, and related the thing to his 3 companions; to desire mercies of the God (Ellah, Eloah, Allah) of heaven concerning this secret (mystery, problem); that they would not be slain along with rest of the wise men of Babylon. The secret was revealed to Daniel in a night vision. He blessed the God (Elah, Ellah, Allah) of Heaven: ‘Blessed be the Name of God (Elah) for ever & ever; for wisdom & might are His. He changes the times and the seasons; He removes kings, and sets up kings; He giveth wisdom to the wise, and knowledge to them that have understanding; He reveals the deep and secret things; He knows what is in the darkness, and the light dwells with Him. I thank Thee, and praise Thee, O Thou God (Elah) of my fathers, Who has given me wisdom & might, and has now made known to me what we desired of Thee; for Thou has made known to us the King’s matter.’ Daniel went to Arioch, appointed by the King to destroy the wise men of Babylon; he told him not to destroy the wise men; to lead him to the King to reveal the interpretation. The King asked Daniel (Belteshazzar), ‘Can yu tell me my dream & its interpretation’? He replied to the King, ‘The King’s mystery the wise men, enchanters, magicians, & soothsayers cannot reveal to the King; but there is a God (Elah) in heaven That reveals secrets, He has revealed to King Nebuchadnezzar what will occur in the latter days (end times)’.
‘Thy Dream, & the Visions of thy head on thy bed, are these: as for thee, King, thy thoughts on thy bed, what should be hereafter; and He That reveals secrets has made known to thee what shall be. But as for me, this secret (mystery) is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than any living, but to the intent that the interpretation may be revealed to the King, to know the thoughts of thy heart. Thou, King, saw, a Great Image. This Image, which was mighty, and whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; its aspect was terrible (awesome). As for this image, its Head was of fine Gold, its Breast & its Arms of Silver, its Belly & its Thighs of Brass, its Legs of Iron, its Feet part of Iron, & part of Clay. Thou saw till a Stone was cut out without hands, which smote the Image upon its Feet of Iron & Clay, and brake them in pieces. Then was the Iron, Clay, Brass, Silver, & gold, broken in pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing-floors; and the wind carried them away, so that no place was found for them: and the Stone that smote the Image became a Great Mountain, and filled the whole earth. This is the Dream; and we will tell its Interpretation to the King. Thou, King, are King of Kings, to whom the God (Ellah) of heaven has given the (1st) Kingdom, power, strength, & the glory; and wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field & the birds of the heavens He has given into thy hand, and has made thee to rule over them all: thou are the Head of Gold. And after thee shall arise another (2nd Silver) Kingdom inferior to thee; and another third (3rd) Kingdom of Brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth. And the fourth (4th) Kingdom shall be strong as Iron, forasmuch as Iron breaks in pieces and subdues all things; and as Iron that crushes all these, shall it break in pieces & crush. And whereas thou saw the Feet & Toes, part of potters’ Clay, & part of Iron, it shall be a divided Kingdom; but there shall be in it of the strength of the Iron, as thou saw the Iron mixed with miry Clay. And as the Toes of the Feet were part of Iron, and part of Clay, so the Kingdom shall be partly strong, & partly broken. And whereas thou saw the Iron mixed with miry Clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men; but they shall not cleave one to another, even as Iron does not mingle with Clay. And in the days of those Kings shall the God (Ellah) of heaven set up a (5th) Kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor shall its sovereignty be left to another people; but it shall break in pieces & consume all these Kingdoms, and it shall stand forever. As thou saw a Stone was cut out of the Mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the Iron, Brass, Clay, Silver, & the Gold; the Great God (Elah Rab) has revealed to the King what shall be hereafter: the Dream is certain, & its Interpretation sure.’
King Nebuchadnezzar prostrated, worshipped (bowed, reverenced, honored) Daniel, and commanded to offer an oblation & sweet odors to him. The King responded to Daniel: ‘Truth, your God (Elah) is the God of Gods (Elah Elahin), the Lord of Kings, & Revealer of secrets, Who enabled yu to reveal this secret (mystery)’. The King made Daniel Great (Rabi, that is, Rabbi Daniel); gave him many great gifts, and made him to rule over the whole province of Babylon, and to be Chief Governor over the wise-men of Babylon. Daniel requested of the King, and he appointed Shadrach, Meshach, & Abed-nego, over the affairs of the province: Daniel stayed in the King’s Gate.
King Nebuchadnezzar, made an Image (tzelem, statue, likeness, monument, pillar) of Gold, whose height was 60 cubits (90 feet, cubit @ 1 1/2′, or 18″), its width 6 cubits (9′): he set it up in the Plain of Dura, (near modern Babli Al Hillah near Euphrates River southwest of Baghdad) in the province of Babylon. King Nebuchadnezzar summoned the satraps, deputies, governors, judges, treasurers, counselors, sheriffs, & all the rulers of the provinces, to the dedication of the Image he erected; they came to his dedication. The Herald proclaimed:
‘It is Commanded. Peoples, Nations, & Languages: When you hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer, and all kinds of music, you fall down and worship the Golden Image that King Nebuchadnezzar has stood up; and those who refuse to prostrate & worship will be immediately thrown into the fiery furnace’.
At that time some Chaldeans brought accusation against the Jews. They presented to King Nebuchadnezzar: ‘Forever live the King! The King has made a decree, that everyman to bow & worship the Golden Image on hearing the musical presentation (orchestra); and those who refuse must be thrown into the fiery furnace. Certain Jews thou has appointed over the affairs of the province of Babylon: Shadrach, Meshach, & Abed-nego; these men, King, have disregarded thee: they serve not thy Gods (Elahin), nor worship the Golden Image which thou hast set up’. Nebuchadnezzar in rage & fury ordered to bring them to stand before him, & they came: Nebuchadnezzar asked them, ‘What is your reason that ye serve not my ‘God’ (Elah), nor worship the Golden Image which I have set up? Be ready to fall down & worship the Image which I have made: but if ye worship not, ye shall be cast the same hour into the midst of a burning fiery furnace; and who is that ‘god’ (elah) that shall deliver you out of my hands? They answered: ‘King Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer thee in this matter. Our God (Elah) Whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace; and He will deliver us out of thy hand. But if not, be it known unto thee, King, that we will not serve thy ‘gods’ (elahin), nor worship the Golden Image which thou has set up’. Nebuchadnezzar, enraged, his facial expression changed against them: he ordered the furnace to be heated up 7 times hotter than usual; he commanded certain mighty men that were in his army to bind Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, to throw them into the burning fiery furnace. They were bound in their underclothing, robes, mantles, & garments, and were thrown into the midst of the burning fiery furnace. Because the King’s commandment was urgent, the furnace exceeding hot, the flame of the fire scorched those men that carried them. These 3 men fell down bound into the midst of the burning fiery furnace. Then King Nebuchadnezzar was astonished, rose up in haste: he spake and said unto his counsellors, ‘Did not we throw 3 men bound into the midst of the fire’? They answered the King, ‘True’; he said, ‘I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they are not hurt; and the aspect (form) of the 4th is like a son of the ‘gods’ (bar-elahin)’. Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to the mouth of the burning fiery furnace: he called, ‘Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, you servants of the Most High God (Elaha Illaiah Illaah, or compare Abram’s expression to Melchizedek: El Elyon), come forth, and come here’. They came forth out of the midst of the fire. And the satraps, deputies, governors, & the King’s counsellors, being gathered together, saw these men, that the fire had no power upon their bodies, nor was the hair of their head singed, neither were their clothes changed, nor had the smell of fire passed on them. Nebuchadnezzar said, ‘Blessed be the God (Elah) of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, Who hath sent His Angel (Messenger, Malacheh), and delivered His Servants that trusted in Him, and have changed the King’s word, and have yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any ‘god’ (elah), except their own God (Elah). Therefore I make a decree, that every people, nation, and language, which speak anything amiss against the God (Elah) of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a dunghill; because there is no other ‘god’ (elah) that is able to deliver after this sort’. The King promoted Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego in the province of Babylon. [The next 3 verses: 4:1-3, is in the Hebrew Text 6:31-33.]
‘King Nebuchadnezzar, to all the peoples, nations, & languages, that dwell in all the earth: Peace be multiplied to you. It seemed good to me to show the signs & wonders that the Most High God hath wrought toward me. How great are His signs! and how mighty are His wonders! His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and His dominion is from generation to generation’. ‘I, Nebuchadnezzar, was at rest in my house, flourishing in my palace. I saw a dream which made me afraid; the thoughts on my bed & the visions of my head troubled me. I made a decree to bring in all the wise men of Babylon before me, to make known to me the interpretation of the dream. Then came in the magicians, the enchanters, the Chaldeans, and the soothsayers; and I told the dream to them; but they did not reveal to me its interpretation. At last Daniel, Belteshazzar, according to the name of my ‘god’ (elah), came in before me, in whom is the ‘spirit (ruach) of the holy ‘gods’ (elahin): and I told the dream to him: ‘Belteshazzar, Master of the magicians, I know that the spirit (ruach) of the holy gods (elahin) is in thee, no secret troubles thee: tell me the visions of my dream, & its interpretation’. The Visions of my head on my bed: I saw a Tree in the midst of the earth; and its height was great. The Tree grew, & was strong, its height reached to heaven, the sight of it to the end of the earth. Its leaves were fair, its fruit much, and in it was food for all: the beasts of the field had shadow under it, and the birds of the heavens dwelt in its branches, all flesh was fed from it. I saw in the Visions of my head on my bed, a Watcher & a Holy One came down from heaven. He cried aloud: ‘Hew down the Tree, and cut off its branches, shake off its leaves, scatter its fruit: let the beasts get away from under it, and the fowls from its branches. Leave the stump of its roots in the earth, even with a band of iron & brass, in the tender grass of the field; let it be wet with the dew of heaven: let his portion be with the beasts in the grass of the earth: let his heart be changed from man’s, let a beast’s heart be given to him; let seven (7) times pass over him. The sentence is by the decree of the Watchers, the demand by the word of the Holy Ones; to the intent the living may know the Most High rules in the Kingdom of men, and gives it to whomsoever He will, and sets up over it the lowest of men’. This dream I, King Nebuchadnezzar, have seen; and thou, Belteshazzar, declare the interpretation, for all the wise men of my Kingdom are not able to make known to me the interpretation; but thou are able; for the spirit of the holy ‘gods’ (elahin) is in thee’. Then Daniel, Belteshazzar, was stricken dumb for a while, his thoughts troubled him. The King responded, ‘Belteshazzar, let not the dream, or the interpretation, trouble thee’. Belteshazzar answered, ‘My Lord, the dream be to them that hate thee, and its interpretation to thine adversaries: The Tree that thou saw, which grew, & was strong, whose height reached to heaven, its sight to all the earth; whose leaves were fair, its fruit much, and in it was food for all; under it the beasts of the field dwelt, on whose branches the birds of the heavens had their habitation: it is thou, King, that art grown & become strong; thy greatness is grown, it reaches to heaven, thy dominion to the end of the earth. The King saw a Watcher and a Holy One coming down from heaven, saying, ‘Hew down the Tree, destroy it; leave the stump of its roots in the earth, with a band of iron & brass, in the tender grass of the field, let it be wet with the dew of heaven: let his portion be with the beasts of the field, till 7 times pass over him’; this is the interpretation, King, it is the decree of the Most High, which is come on my Lord the King: that thou shall be driven from men, thy dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field, thou shall eat grass as oxen, shall be wet with the dew of heaven, 7 times shall pass over thee; till thou know the Most High rules in the Kingdom of men, and gives it to whomsoever He will. They commanded to leave the stump of the roots of the Tree: thy Kingdom shall be sure to thee, after thou shall learnt that the heavens do rule. So, King, let my counsel be acceptable to thee, break off thy sins by righteousness, thine iniquities by showing mercy to the poor; if there may be a lengthening of thy tranquillity’. All this came upon King Nebuchadnezzar. At the end of twelve (12) months he was walking in the Royal Palace [Hanging Gardens] of Babylon. The King boasted, ‘Is not this Great Babylon, which I have built for the Royal Dwelling-place, by the might of my power and for the glory of my majesty’? While the word was in the King’s mouth, there fell a Voice from heaven: ‘King Nebuchadnezzar, to thee it is spoken: The Kingdom is departed from thee: thou shall be driven from men; thy dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field; thou shalt be made to eat grass as oxen; 7 times shall pass over thee; until thou learn the Most High rules in the Kingdom of men, He gives it to whomsoever He will’. The same hour was the thing fulfilled on Nebuchadnezzar: he was driven from men, he did eat grass as oxen, his body was wet with the dew of heaven, till his hair was grown like eagles’, his nails like birds’. ‘At the end of the days I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted up mine eyes to heaven, mine understanding returned to me, I blessed the Most High, I praised & honored Him That liveth for ever; for His Dominion is an everlasting dominion, and His Kingdom from generation to generation; the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; He does according to His will in the Army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth; none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What does thou? At the same time mine understanding returned to me; the glory of my kingdom, my majesty & brightness returned to me; my counsellors & my lords sought to me; I was re-established in my Kingdom, and excellent greatness was added to me. I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise, extol, & honor the King of heaven; for all His works are truth, and His ways justice; and those that walk in pride He is able to abase’.

King Belshazzar made a great feast for 1,000 of his Lords (rabrebon, fr. rab = great ones, masters, etc.), and drank wine with them. Belshazzar, while he tasted the wine, commanded to bring the golden & silver vessels which his father Nebuchadnezzar took from the Temple at Jerusalem; that the King & his Lords, his wives & his concubines, might drink therefrom. Then they brought the golden vessels that were taken out of the Temple of God’s House (Beth Elaha) which was at Jerusalem; and they all drank from them. They drank wine, praised the ‘gods’ (elahin) of gold, silver, brass, iron, wood, & of stone. In the same hour appeared the Fingers of a man’s hand, and wrote opposite the candlestick (lampstand) on the plaster of the wall of the King’s Palace: the King saw the part of the Hand that wrote. The King’s countenance was changed, his thoughts disturbed him; the joints of his loins were loosed, his knees touched one another. The King shouted to bring in the enchanters, the Chaldeans, the soothsayers. The King spoke to the wise men of Babylon, ‘Whoever shall read this writing, and show me its interpretation, shall be clothed with purple, and have a chain of gold about his neck, and shall be the 3rd Ruler in the Kingdom’. All the King’s wise men came in, but they could not read the writing, nor reveal to the King the interpretation. King Belshazzar was greatly troubled, his facial expression changed, his lords were perplexed. The Queen by reason of the words of the King and his Lords came into the banquet house: the Queen said, ‘King, live forever; let not thy thoughts trouble thee, nor let thy countenance be changed. There is a man in thy Kingdom, in whom is the spirit of the holy ‘gods’ (elahin); in the days of thy father light, understanding & wisdom, like the wisdom of the gods (elahin), were found in him; King Nebuchadnezzar thy father, the King, made him Master (Rab) of the magicians, enchanters, Chaldeans, and soothsayers; forasmuch as an excellent spirit, knowledge, understanding, interpreting of dreams, showing of dark sentences, and dissolving of doubts, were found in the same Daniel, whom the King renamed Belteshazzar. Let Daniel be called, and he will reveal the interpretation’. Daniel was brought in before the King. The King asked Daniel, ‘Are thou that Daniel, who is of the children of the Captivity of Judah, whom the King, my father, brought out of Judah? I have heard of thee, that the spirit of the ‘gods’ (elahin) is in thee, that light, understanding, & excellent wisdom are found in thee. The wise men & enchanters have been brought in before me, to read this writing, and reveal to me its interpretation; but they could not reveal the interpretation of the thing. But I have heard of thee, that thou can give interpretations & dissolve doubts; now if thou can read the writing, and reveal to me its interpretation, thou shall be clothed with purple, with a chain of gold about thy neck, and shall be the 3rd Ruler in the Kingdom’. Daniel answered the King, ‘Let thy gifts be to thyself, and give thy rewards to another; I will read the writing for the King, & reveal to him the interpretation: Thou King, the Most High God (Elaha Illaia Illaah) gave thy father Nebuchadnezzar the Kingdom, greatness, glory, & majesty: because of the greatness that He gave him, all the peoples, nations, & languages trembled and feared before him: whom he would he slew, whom he would he kept alive; whom he would he raised up, whom he would he put down. When his heart was lifted up, and his spirit was hardened so that he dealt proudly, he was deposed from his kingly Throne, and they took his glory from him: he was driven from the sons of men, his heart was made like the beasts’, his dwelling was with the wild donkeys; he was fed with grass like oxen, his body was wet with the dew of heaven; till he learnt that the Most High God (Elaha Illaia Illaah) rules in the Kingdom of men, and that he sets up over it whomever He will. Thou, his son, Belshazzar, has not humbled thy heart, though thou knew all this, but hast lifted up thyself against the Lord of Heaven (Mareh-Shemaia); they have brought the vessels of His House before thee, and thou & thy lords, thy wives & thy concubines, have drunk wine from them; thou hast praised the ‘gods’ (elahin) of silver, gold, brass, iron, wood, stone, which see not, nor hear, nor know; the God (Elah) in Whose Hand thy breath is, and Whose are all thy ways, hast thou not glorified. Then was the part of the Hand sent from before him, and this writing was inscribed. This is the writing that was inscribed: MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN. This is the interpretation of the thing: MENE: God (Elaha) has numbered thy Kingdom, and brought it to an end; TEKEL: thou are weighed in the balances, and are found deficient. PERES: thy Kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes & Persians’. Then commanded Belshazzar, and they clothed Daniel with purple, put a chain of gold about his neck, made proclamation concerning him, that he should be the 3rd ruler in the Kingdom. In that night Belshazzar the Chaldean King was slain. [5:31 = 6:1 Heb.]
Darius the Mede took the Kingdom, being about 62 years old.
It pleased Darius to set over the Kingdom 120 Satraps, to be throughout the whole Kingdom, and over them three Presidents, of whom Daniel was one; that these Satraps might give account to them, that the King should have no damage. Daniel was distinguished above the Presidents & the Satraps, because an excellent spirit was in him; and the King thought to set him over the whole realm. The Presidents & the Satraps sought to find occasion against Daniel as regarding the Kingdom; but they could find no occasion nor fault, forasmuch as he was faithful, neither was there any error or fault found in him. Then said these men, ‘We shall not find any occasion against Daniel, except we find it against him concerning the Law of his God (Eloah)’. These presidents and satraps assembled together to the King, and said: King Darius, live forever. All the presidents of the Kingdom, the Deputies, Satraps, Counsellors, & Governors, have consulted together to establish a royal statute, and to make a strong interdict, that whosoever shall ask a petition of any ‘god’ (elah) or man for 30 days, except from thee, King, he shall be cast into the den of lions. King, establish the interdict, sign the writing, that it be not changed, according to the Law of the Medes & Persians, which alters not. King Darius signed the writing & the interdict. Daniel knew that the writing was signed, but he went into his house (now his windows were open in his chamber toward Jerusalem), he kneeled down three times a day, prayed, & gave thanks to his God (Elah), as he did before. These men assembled together, found Daniel making petition & supplication to his God (Elah). They spoke to the King concerning the King’s interdict: ‘Did thou not sign an interdict, that any man that shall make petition to any ‘god’ (elah) or man within 30 days, except to thee, O King, shall be thrown into the den of lions’? The King replied, ‘It’s true, according to the Law of the Medes & Persians, which alters not’. They answered the King: ‘Daniel, who is of the children of the Captivity of Judah, regards thee not, King, nor the interdict that thou has signed, but makes his petition 3 times a day’. The King, hearing these words, was sore displeased, and set his heart on Daniel to deliver him; and he labored till the going down of the sun to rescue him. These men assembled together to the King, said to the King: ‘Know, King, it is a Law of the Medes & Persians, that no interdict nor statute which the King establishes may be changed’. The King commanded, they arrested Daniel, pushed him into the den of lions. The King said to Daniel: Thy God (Elah) Whom thou serve continually, He will deliver thee. A stone was brought, and laid upon the mouth of the den; and the King sealed it with his own signet, and with the signet of his Lords; that nothing might be changed concerning Daniel. The King went to his Palace, and passed the night fasting; neither were instruments of music brought before him: and his sleep fled from him. The King arose early in the morning, and went in haste to the den of lions. He came near to the den to Daniel, he cried with a lamentable voice; the King said to Daniel: ‘Daniel, servant of the living God, is thy God, Whom thou serve continually, able to deliver thee from the lions’? Daniel answered the King, ‘King, live forever, my God (Elah) hath sent His Angel (Messenger), and has shut the lions’ mouths, and they have not hurt me; forasmuch as before Him innocency was found in me; and also before thee, King, have I done no hurt’. The King was exceeding glad, ordered they take Daniel up out of the den. So Daniel was taken up out of the den, and no manner of hurt was found upon him, because he had trusted in his God (Elah). The King commanded, and they brought those men that had accused Daniel, and they threw them into the den of lions, with their children & wives; the lions had the mastery of them, and brake all their bones in pieces, before they came to the bottom of the den. King Darius wrote to all the peoples, nations, & languages, that dwell in all the earth: ‘Peace be multiplied unto you. I make a decree, that in all the dominion of my Kingdom men tremble & fear before the God (Elah) of Daniel; for He is the living God (Elah), and stedfast forever, His Kingdom shall not be destroyed; his dominion shall be even unto the end; He delivers & rescues, He works signs & wonders in heaven & in earth, Who has delivered Daniel from the power of the lions’.
Daniel prospered in the reign of Darius, and in the reign of Cyrus the Persian.

In the 1st year of King Belshazzar of Babylon Daniel had a Dream & Visions of his head on his bed: then he wrote the Dream and told the sum of the matters. Daniel said: ‘I saw in my Vision by night, the ‘4 Winds’ of heaven brake forth on the ‘Great Sea (Mediterranean Sea)’. ‘4 Great Beasts’ came up from the ‘Sea’, diverse one from another. The ‘1st Beast’ was like a ‘Lion’, with ‘Eagle’s Wings’: I beheld till its ‘Wings’ were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made to stand upon ‘2 Feet’ as a ‘Man’; a ‘Man’s Heart’ was given to it. Look, a ‘2nd Beast’, like to a ‘Bear’, it was raised up on ‘1 Side (Foot)’, ‘3 Ribs’ were in its ‘Mouth’ between its ‘Teeth’: they said to it, ‘Arise, devour much flesh’. I beheld, ‘3rd One’, like a ‘Leopard’, which had on its ‘Back, 4 Bird Wings’; the ‘Beast’ had ‘4 Heads’; and dominion was given to it. After this I saw in the Night-Visions, a ‘4th Beast’, terrible & powerful, & strong exceedingly; and it had ‘Great Iron Teeth’; it devoured & brake in pieces, & stamped the residue with its ‘Feet’: it was diverse from all the ‘Beasts’ that were before it; it had ’10 Horns’. I considered the ‘Horns’, there came up among them another ‘Horn’, a ‘Little One’ (Little Horn), before which ‘3 of the 1st Horns’ (3 Earlier Horns) were plucked up by the ‘Roots’: in this ‘Horn’ were ‘Eyes’ like the ‘Eyes of a Man’, a ‘Mouth’ ‘speaking great things’. I beheld till ‘Thrones’ were placed, ‘One That was Ancient of Days’ did sit: His ‘Raiment’ was ‘White’ as ‘Snow’, the ‘Hair’ of His ‘Head’ like ‘Pure Wool’; His ‘Throne’ was ‘Fiery Flames’, the its ‘Wheels Burning Fire’. A ‘Fiery Stream’ issued & came forth from before Him: 1,000s of 1,000s ministered to Him, 10,000 times 10,000 stood before Him: the Judgment was set, and the ‘Books’ were opened. I beheld at that time because of the ‘Voice’ of the ‘Great Words’ which the ‘Horn’ spoke; I beheld even till the ‘Beast’ was slain, and its ‘Body’ destroyed, and it was given to be burned with fire. The other ‘Beasts’, their dominion was taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time. I saw in the Night-Visions, there came with the clouds of heaven ‘One’ like a ‘Son of Man (Bar Enosh)’, and He came even to the ‘Ancient of Days’, and they brought Him near before Him. There was given Him Dominion, & Glory, & a Kingdom, that all the Peoples, Nations, & Languages should serve Him: His dominion is an Everlasting Dominion, which shall not pass away, and His Kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. As for me, Daniel, my spirit was grieved in the midst of my body, and the Visions of my head troubled me. I came near to one of them that stood by, and asked him the truth concerning all this. So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things:’
‘These ‘4 Great Beasts’, are ‘4 Kings’, that shall arise out of the earth. The Saints of the Most High shall receive the Kingdom, and possess the Kingdom forever, even for ever & ever’. I desired to know the truth concerning the ‘4th Beast’, and concerning the ’10 Horns’ that were on its ‘Head’, and the ‘Other One’ which came up, and before him 3 fell, that ‘Other Horn’ that had ‘Eyes’, & a ‘Mouth’ that ‘spoke great things’, whose look was more stout than its fellows. I beheld, the ‘Same Horn’ ‘made war with the Saints, & prevailed against them’; till the ‘Ancient of Days’ came, and Judgment was given to the Saints of the Most-High (Elyon), and the time came that the Saints possessed the Kingdom. The ’10 Horns’: out of this Kingdom shall ’10 Kings’ arise: and ‘Another’ shall arise after them; and he shall be diverse from the ‘Former’, and he shall put down ‘3 Kings’. ‘He shall speak words against the Most-High (Elyon), and shall wear out the saints of the Most- High (Elyon); and he shall think to change the times and the law; and they shall be given into his hand until a Time & Times & Half Time’. ‘The Judgment shall be set, they shall take away his Dominion, to consume and to destroy it to the end. The Kingdom & 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 (Elyon): His Kingdom is an Everlasting Kingdom, and all Dominions shall serve and obey Him’.
‘Here is the end of the matter. As for me, Daniel, my thoughts much troubled me, and my countenance was changed in me: but I kept the matter in my heart’.

‘In the 3rd year of the reign of King Belshazzar a Vision appeared to me, Daniel, after what appeared to me formerly (i.e. in 1st yr): I saw in the Vision (I was in Shushan the Palace, in the province of Elam; I was by the River (Canal) Ulai (near Susa)): there stood near the River a ‘Ram’ which had ‘2 Horns’: the ‘2 Horns’ were High (Long, Tall, Big); but one was Higher (Longer) than the other, and the Higher came up last. I saw the ‘Ram’ pushing ‘Westward, Northward, & Southward’; no ‘Beasts’ could stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his Hand (Power); but he did according to his will, and magnified himself. As I was considering, a ‘He-Goat’ came from the ‘West’ over the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: the ‘Goat’ had a ‘Notable (Great) Horn between his Eyes’. He came to the ‘Ram’ that had the ‘2 Horns’, which I saw standing near the River, and ran to him in the fury of his power. I saw him going close to the ‘Ram’, and he was moved with anger against him, and struck the ‘Ram’, and brake his ‘2 Horns’; and there was no power in the ‘Ram’ to stand before him; but he battered him down to the ground, and trampled on him; there was none that could deliver the ‘Ram’ out of his hand. The ‘He-Goat’ magnified himself exceedingly: and when he was strong, the ‘Great Horn’ was broken; and in place of it there came up ‘4 Notable Ones’ toward the ‘4 Winds’ of heaven. ‘Out of One’ of them came forth a ‘Little Horn’, which grew exceeding great, ‘toward the South, toward the East, & toward the Glorious (?)’. It grew great, even to the ‘Host of Heaven’; and some of the ‘Host & of the Stars’ it battered down to the ground, & trampled on them. It magnified itself, even to the ‘Prince of the Host’; and it took away from him the ‘Continual (Offering, Sacrifice)’, and the ‘Place of his Sanctuary’ was cast down. The ‘Host’ was given over together with the ‘Continual (Offering, Sacrifice)’ through transgression; and it cast down truth to the ground, and it continued & prospered. I heard a ‘Holy One’ speaking; and another ‘Holy One’ said to the ‘One’ who spake, ‘How long shall be the Vision of the Continual (Offering, Sacrifice), and the transgression that makes desolate, to give both the Sanctuary & the Host to be trodden under foot’? He said unto me, ‘Unto 2,300 Evenings-Mornings; then shall the Sanctuary be cleansed’. When I, Daniel, had seen the ‘Vision’, I sought to understand it; there stood before me as the appearance of a ‘Man’. I heard a ‘Man’s Voice’ between the Ulai, which called out, ‘Gabriel, make this man to understand the Vision’. He came near where I stood; and when he came, I was affrighted, and fell on my face: but he said unto me, ‘Understand, Son of man; for the Vision belongs to the End Time’. As he was speaking with me, I fell into a deep sleep with my face toward the ground; but he touched me, and set me upright. He said, ‘I will make reveal what shall be in the Latter Time (End Time) of the indignation; for it belongs to the appointed Time of the End (End Time). The ‘Ram’ which thou saw, with ‘2 Horns’, they are the ‘Kings of Media & Persia’. The rough (aggressive) ‘He-Goat is the King of Greece: the Great Horn between his eyes is the 1st King’. What was broken, in its place ‘4 Ones’ stood up, ‘4 Kingdoms’ shall stand up out of the Nation, but not with his power. ‘In the Latter Time (End Time) of their Kingdom’, when the transgressors are come to the full, a ‘King’ of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. His power shall be mighty, but not by his own power; and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper and continue; and he shall destroy ‘the Mighty Ones & the Holy People’. Through his policy he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and in security (unchallenged) shall he destroy many: he shall also stand up against the ‘Prince of Princes’; but he shall be broken without hand. ‘The Vision of the Evenings & Mornings which was told is true: but shut thou up the Vision; for it belongs to Many Days (End Times)’ . I, Daniel, fainted, and was sick certain days; then I rose up, and did the King’s business: and I wondered at the ‘Vision’, but none understood it’.

In 1st year of Darius (?, Cyrus) the son of Ahasuerus (?, Astyages, Artaxerxes, Xerxes 1st, the Great), of the seed of the Medes (Persian-Mede), who was made King over the realm of the Chaldeans. ‘In the 1st year of his reign I, Daniel, understood by the Books (Scrolls) the number of the years whereof Jehovah’s Word (Debhar-YHWah) came to Jeremiah the Prophet, for the accomplishing of ’70 years Desolations of Jerusalem’. I set my face to the Lord God (El-Adhon), to seek by prayer & supplications, with fasting, sackcloth, & ashes. I prayed to Jehovah my God (YHWaH Elohai), and made confession: ‘Lord (Adhonai), the Great and Dreadful God (haEl), Who keeps covenant and lovingkindness with them that love Him and keep His commandments: we have sinned, have dealt perversely, have done wickedly, have rebelled, even turning aside from Thy precepts & from thine ordinances; neither have we listened to Thy Servants the Prophets, that spake in Thy Name to our kings, our princes, and our fathers, to the people of the land. Lord (Adonai), righteousness belongs to Thee, but to us confusion of face, as at this day; to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to all Israel, that are near, & that are far off, through the countries whither Thou hast driven them, because of their trespasses against Thee. Lord (Adonai), to us confusion of face, to our kings, to our princes, and to our fathers, because we have sinned against Thee. To the Lord our God (Adonai Elohenu) belong mercies and forgiveness; for we have rebelled against Him; neither have we obeyed the Voice of Jehovah our God (YHWah Elohenu), to walk in His Laws, which He set before us by His Servants the prophets. Israel have transgressed Thy Law, turning aside, that they should not obey Thy Voice: the curse has been poured out upon us, and the Oath that is written in the Law of Moses the Servant of God (haElohim); for we have sinned against Him. He confirmed His words, which He spoke against us, against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil; for under the whole heaven has not been done as has been done on Jerusalem. As it is written in the Law of Moses, all this evil is come on us: yet have we not entreated the favor of Jehovah our God (YHWah Elohenu), that we should turn from our iniquities, and have discernment in Thy truth. Jehovah (YHWah) watched over the evil, and brought it on us; for Jehovah our God (YHWah) is righteous in His Works which He doeth, and we have not obeyed His Voice. Lord our God (Adonai Elohenu), Who has led Thy people forth out of the land of Egypt with a Mighty Hand, and has gotten Thee renown, as at this day; we have sinned, we have done wickedly. Lord (Adonai), according to all Thy Righteousness, let Thine Anger & Thy Wrath, I pray Thee, be turned away from Thy City Jerusalem, Thy Holy Mountain; because for our sins, & for the iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem & Thy People are become a reproach to all around us. Our God (Elehenu), listen to the prayer of Thy Servant, and to his supplications, and cause Thy face to shine upon Thy Sanctuary that is desolate, for the Lord’s sake. My God (Elohai), incline Thine ear, and hear; open Thine Eyes, behold our desolations, and the City which is called by Thy Name: for we do not present our supplications before Thee for our righteousness, but for Thy Great Mercies’ Sake. Lord (Adonai), hear; Lord (Adonai), forgive; Lord (Adonai), listen & do; defer not, for Thine Own Sake, my God (Elohai), because Thy City and Thy People are called by Thy Name’. ‘While I was speaking, praying, & confessing my sin & the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before Jehovah my God (YHWah Elohai) for the Holy Mountain of my God (Elohai); yea, while I was speaking in prayer, the Man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the Vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation. He instructed me, talked with me, and said, ‘Daniel, ‘I am now come forth to give thee wisdom and understanding’. At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment went forth, and I am come to tell thee; for thou are greatly beloved: consider the matter, & understand the Vision. ’70 weeks are decreed on thy people and on thy Holy City, to finish transgression, to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up Vision & Prophecy, & to anoint the Most Holy’. ‘Know & discern, from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem to the Anointed One, the Prince, shall be 7 weeks, & 62 weeks: it shall be rebuilt, with street & moat (ditches), even in troublous times. After the 62 weeks shall the Anointed One be cut off, and shall have nothing: the people of the Coming Prince shall destroy the city & the Sanctuary; the end thereof shall be with a flood, to the end shall be war; desolations are determined. He shall make a firm Covenant with many for 1 week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice & the oblation to cease; on the Wing of Abominations Desolating One Rides (Destroyer Comes); to the Full End (End Time), and that determined, shall be poured out upon the desolate (desolation, desolator)’.

In the 3rd year of King Cyrus of Persia a thing was revealed to Daniel, renamed Belteshazzar; the thing was true, of a great warfare: he understood the thing, and had understanding of the Vision. ‘In those days I, Daniel, was mourning 3 whole weeks. I ate no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine into my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all, till 3 whole weeks were fulfilled. On the 24th day of the first month, as I was by the side of the Great River, which is Hiddekel (Tigress not the Euphrates), ‘I saw a Man clothed in linen, Whose Loins were girded with pure gold of Uphaz: His Body also was like the Beryl, His Face as the appearance of Lightning, His Eyes as Flaming Torches, His Arms & His Feet like to Burnished Brass, the Voice of His Words like the Sound of a Multitude’. I, Daniel, alone saw the Vision; for the men that were with me saw not the Vision; but a great quaking fell upon them, and they fled to hide themselves. I was left alone, & saw this Great Vision, and there remained no strength in me; for my comeliness (splendour, vigour) was turned in me into corruption, and I retained no strength. Yet I heard the Voice of his Words; then I fell into deep-sleep (trance, dream) prostrate, with my face toward the ground. A Hand touched me, which put me on my knees & on the palms of my hands. He said to me, ‘Daniel, greatly beloved man, understand the words that I speak unto thee, & stand upright; for to thee am I now sent’. When he had spoken this word unto me, I stood trembling. He said to me, ‘Fear not, Daniel; for from the first day that thou did set thy heart to understand, & to humble thyself before thy God (Eloheka), thy words were heard: and I am come for thy words’ sake. But the Prince of the Kingdom of Persia resisted me 21 days; but, Michael, one of the Chief Princes, came to help me: and I remained there with the Kings of Persia. ‘I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days (End Times); for the vision is yet for [many] days’: when he had spoken to me according to these words, I lowered my face to the ground, & was speechless. ‘One in the likeness of the Sons of Men touched my lips: then I opened my mouth, & said to him that stood before me, my Lord (Adoni), by reason of the Vision my sorrows are turned on me, & I retain no strength. For how can my Lord’s (Adoni) servant talk with this my Lord (Adoni)? for as for me, there remained no strength in me, neither was there breath left in me. Then there touched me again One like the appearance of a Man, and he strengthened me. He said, greatly beloved man, fear not: peace be to thee, be strong, yea, be strong. When he spoke to me, I was strengthened, & said, Let my Lord (Adoni) speak; for thou has strengthened me. Then said he, Know thou wherefore I am come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the Prince of Persia: when I go forth, the Prince of Greece shall come. But I will tell thee that which is inscribed in the Writing of Truth: and there is none that holds with me against these, but Michael your Prince’.
‘And as for me (Gabriel), in the 1st year of Darius the Mede, I stood up to confirm and strengthen him (Michael). I will show thee the Truth: There shall stand up yet 3 Kings in Persia; the 4th shall be far richer than they all: when he is grown strong through his riches, he shall stir up all against the Realm of Greece. A Mighty King shall stand up, that shall rule with Great Dominion, and do according to his will. When he shall stand up, his Kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the 4 Winds of heaven, but not to his posterity, nor according to his Dominion wherewith he ruled; for his Kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others besides these. The King of the South (Egypt south of Judah) shall be strong, & of his Princes; he shall be strong above him, and have Dominion; his Dominion shall be a Great Dominion. At the End of Years (End Times) they shall join themselves together; and the daughter of the King of the South (Egypt) shall come to the King of the North (Syria north of Israel) to make an agreement: but she shall not retain the strength of her arm; neither shall he stand, nor his arm; but she shall be given up, and they that brought her, and he that birthed her, and he that strengthened her in those times. But out of a Shoot from her Roots shall One stand up in his place, who shall come to the army, and shall enter into the fortress of the King of the North (Syria), & shall deal against them, & shall prevail. He shall carry captive their gods, with their molten images, their goodly vessels of silver & of gold, into Egypt (the King of the South); and he shall refrain some years from the King of the North (Syria). He (the Syrian King) shall come into the Realm of the King of the South (to fight with the Egyptian King, but he shall return into his own land. His sons (of the Syrian King) shall war, and shall assemble a multitude of great forces, which shall come on, and overflow, and pass through; and they shall return and war, even to his (Egyptian) fortress. The King of the South (Egypt) shall be moved with anger, and shall come forth and fight with him (the Syrian), with the King of the North (the Syrian); and he (the Syrian) shall set forth a great multitude, and the multitude shall be given into his (the Egyptian, in defeat) hand. The multitude shall be lifted up, and his (Syrian’s) heart shall be exalted; and he (Syrian) shall cast down tens of thousands (in war), but he shall not prevail. The King of the North (the Syrian) shall return (to Syria), and shall set forth (for another battle) a multitude greater than the former; and he (the Syrian) shall engage at the End of the Times of Years (End Times), with a great army and with much substance. In Those Times (End Times) there shall many stand up against the King of the South (Egypt): also the children of the violent among thy people (militant Israelites) shall lift themselves up to establish the Vision; but they shall fall. The King of the North (the Syrian) shall come, and cast up a mound, and take a well-fortified city: and the forces of the South (Egypt) shall not stand, neither his chosen people (allies), neither shall there be any strength to stand. But he (Syrian) that cometh against him (Egyptian) shall do according to his (Syrian’s) own will, and none shall stand before him (the Syrian); and he (Syrian) shall stand in the Glorious Land (Israel & Judah), and in his (Syrian’s) hand shall be destruction. He (Syrian) shall set his face to come with the strength of his whole Kingdom, and with him equitable conditions; and he (Syrian) shall perform them: and he (Syrian) shall give him (the Egyptian) the daughter of women, to corrupt her; but she shall not stand, neither be for him (Syrian). After this shall he (Syrian) turn his face unto the isles (western peoples), and shall take many: but a Prince shall cause the reproach offered by him (Syrian) to cease; he (the Prince) shall cause his (Syrian) reproach to turn upon him. Then he (Syrian) shall turn his face toward the fortresses of his own land (Syria); but he shall stumble and fall, and shall not be found. Then shall stand up in his (Syrian) place one that shall cause an exactor to pass through the glory of the Kingdom; but within few days he (2nd Syrian) shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle. And in his (3rd Syrian ) place shall stand up a Contemptible Person, to whom they had not given the honor of the Kingdom: but he (3rd Syrian) shall come in time of security (peace), and shall obtain the Kingdom by flatteries. And the overwhelming forces shall be overwhelmed from before him (3rd Syrian) , and shall be broken; yea, also the Prince of the Covenant. And after the league made with him he (3rd Syrian) shall work deceitfully; for he (3rd Syrian) shall come up, and shall become strong, with a small people. In time of security (peace) shall he come even upon the fattest places of the province; and he(3rd Syrian) shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers’ fathers; he (3rd Syrian)shall scatter among them prey, and spoil, and substance: yea, he (3rd Syrian) shall devise his devices against the strongholds, even for a time. And he (Syrian, 3rd Syrian) shall stir up his power & his courage against the King of the South (Egyptian) with a great army; and the King of the South (Egypt) shall war in battle with an exceeding great and mighty army; but he (Egyptian) shall not stand; for they (his army) shall devise devices against him (Egyptian). They (his court & allies) that eat of his dainties shall destroy him, and his army shall overflow; and many shall fall down slain. As for both these Kings (Syrian & Egyptian), their hearts shall be to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table: but it shall not prosper; for yet the End shall be at the Time Appointed (End Times). Then shall he (Syrian) return into his land (Syria) with great substance; and his heart [shall be] against the Holy Covenant; and he shall continue (prosper), and return to his own land (Syria). At the Time Appointed (End Time) he (Syrian) shall return, and come into the south (Egypt); but it shall not be in the Latter Time (End Time) as it was in the former (earlier conflicts). For ships of Kittim (west Mediterranean Sea, Cyprus, Rome, Europe) shall come against him (Syrian); therefore he (Syrian) shall be grieved, and shall return, and have indignation against the Holy Covenant, and shall continue: he (Syrian) shall even return, and have regard to them that forsake the Holy Covenant. Forces shall stand on his (Syrian’s) part, they shall profane the Sanctuary, even the Fortress, and shall take away the Continual (Offering, Sacrifice, Oblation); they (Syrian forces))shall set up the Abomination that maketh Desolate. And such as do wickedly against the Covenant shall he (Syrian) pervert by flatteries; but the people that know their God shall be strong, and continue. They (faithful Jews) that are wise among the people shall instruct many; yet they shall fall by the sword and by flame, by captivity and by spoil: days (undetermined). When they (Jews) shall fall, they shall be helped with a little help; but many shall join themselves to them (to the Jews) with flatteries. Some of them (Jews) that are wise shall fall, to refine them, and to purify, and to make them white, even to the Time of the End (End Time); because it is yet for the Time Appointed (End Time). The King (Syrian) shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every ‘god’ (el), and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods (El Elim); and he (Syrian) shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished; for what is determined shall be done. Neither shall he regard the ‘gods’ (elohe) of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any ‘god’ (eloah); for he shall magnify himself above all. In his place shall he honor the ‘god’ (eloah) of fortresses; and a ‘god’ (eloah) whom his fathers knew not shall he honor with gold, silver, precious stones, & pleasant things. He shall deal with the strongest fortresses by the help of a foreign ‘god’ (eloah): whosoever acknowledges he (Syrian) will increase with glory; and he (Syrian) shall cause them (his allies, vassals) to rule over many, and shall divide the land for a price. And at the Time of the End (End Time) shall the King of the South (Egyptian)) contend with him (Syrian); and the King of the North (Syrian) shall come against him (Syrian) like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he (Syrian) shall enter into the countries (Canaan, Arabs, Egypt), and shall overflow and pass through. He shall enter also into the Glorious Land (Israel & Judah), and many shall be overthrown; but these shall be delivered out of his (Syrian’s) hand: Edom & Moab, & the chief of the children of Ammon. He shall extend his (Syrian’s) hand also upon the countries; and the land of Egypt (the South) shall not escape. But he (the Syrian) shall have power over the treasures of gold & of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt; and the Libyans & the Ethiopians (Egypt’s allies) shall be at his (Syrian’s) steps. But news out of the East & out of the North shall trouble him (while in his southern campaign); and he (Syrian) shall go forth (back to Syria) with great fury to destroy and utterly to sweep away many. And he (Syrian) shall plant the tents of his palace between the Sea (Great Sea, Mediterranean Sea) and the Glorious Holy Mountain (Zion. Jerusalem); yet he (Syrian) shall come to his end, and none shall help him. And at That Time shall Michael stand up, the Great Prince who standeth for the children of thy people; and there shall be a Time of Trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at That Time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the Book. And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame & everlasting contempt. And they that are wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever & ever. ‘But thou, Daniel, Close the Words, & Seal the Book, even to the Time of the End (End Time): many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased’. Then I, Daniel, saw, there stood 2 others, the one on the brink of the river on this side, and the other on the brink of the river on that side. And one said to the Man Clothed in Linen, Who was above the waters of the river, ‘How long shall it be to the End of these Wonders’? And I heard the Man Clothed in Linen, Who was above the waters of the river, when He held up His Right Hand & His Left hand to heaven, and swore by Him That Lives Forever that it shall be for a Time, Times, and a Half; and when they have made an end of breaking in pieces the power of the Holy People, all these things shall be finished’. And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, my Lord (Adoni), what shall be the issue of these things? And he said, ‘Go thy way, Daniel; for the words are closed and sealed till the Time of the End (End Time). Many shall purify themselves, make themselves white, & be refined; but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand; but they that are wise shall understand. And from the time that the continual (Offering, Sacrifice, Oblation) shall be taken away, and the Abomination that maketh Desolate set up, there shall be 1290 days. Blessed is he that waits, & comes to the 1335 days. But go thou thy way Till the End be; for thou shall rest, and shall stand in thy lot, at the End of the Days (End Times)’.’

Chronology from Persian King Cyrus to Jewish King Messiah of 600 Years: End of 70 Years Babylonian Captivity of the Old Testament to the New Testament. (Variable 1-3 years.)
001: 70th yr of the 70 Years Captivity Ends. (Belshazzar killed. Darius the Median (Astyages) takes the Throne. (Astyages (Ahasuerus, Artaxerxes) marries Esther.). Cyrus, Astyages son, Decree rebuilding of Temple. Daniel’s Vision of the 70 Sevens. Temple Foundation laid. Nehemiah in Jerusalem.) (Zerubbabel & Remnant Returns to Jerusalem. Feast of Tabernacles observed.) (1st yr of Persian rule: Cyrus, etc.)
002: (1st yr of Persian rule: Cyrus, etc. Achaemenid Empire begins from 120 yrs of earlier history, from the Achaemenes, Teispids, & Achaemenid family tree: Teispes, Cyrus I, Cambyses I and Cyrus II, also known as Cyrus the Great, who created the empire (the later Behistun Inscription, written by Darius the Great, claims that Teispes was the son of Achaemenes and that Darius is also descended from Teispes through a different line, but no earlier texts mention Achaemenes). In Herodotus’ Histories, he writes that Cyrus the Great was the son of Cambyses I & Mandane of Media, the daughter of Astyages, the king of the Median Empire.)
003: (1st yr of Persian rule: Cyrus, etc.) (Daniel dies @ 90.)
004: (1st yr of Persian rule: Cyrus, etc.)
005: (1st yr of Persian rule: Cyrus, etc.)
006: (1st yr of Persian rule: Cyrus, etc.) (King Cyrus dies.) (Cambyses makes Nehemiah Governor in Jerusalem.)
007: (Persian rule.)
008: (Persian rule.)
009: (Persian rule.)
010: (Persian rule.)

020: (Persian rule.)

030: (Persian rule.)

040: (Persian rule.)

050: (Persian rule.)

060: (Persian rule.)

070: (Persian rule.)

080: (Persian rule.)

090: (Persian rule.)

100: (Persian rule. 1st Cent,)

150: (Persian rule.)

200: (Persian rule. 2nd Cent.)

220: (Persian rule, Ends after 220 yrs after conquest of Babylon.) (Greek Empire begins with Alexander the Great & his 4 Generals: Ptolemaic Egypt, Seleucid Mesopotamia and Central Asia, Attalid Anatolia, and Antigonid Macedon. Alexander IV and Philip III were murdered )

250: (Greek rule.)

300: (Greek rule.)

320: (Greek rule. 1st Cent.)

350: (Greek rule.)

400: (Greek rule.)

420: (Greek rule. 2nd Cent.)

410: (Greek rule.)

420: (Greek rule.)

430: (Greek rule.)

440: (Greek rule.)

450: (Greek rule.)

460: (Greek rule.)

470: (Greek rule.)

480: (Greek rule.)

490: (Greek rule.)

500: (Greek rule.)

510: (Greek rule.)

520: (Greek rule. 3rd Cent.)

530: (Roman rule ends. Roman rule begins with Julius Caesar & Augustus.)

540: (Roman rule.)

550: (Roman rule.)

560: (Roman rule.) (B.C. dates change to A.D. dates.) (New Testament. Jesus the Christ (Messiah)is born.)

570: (Roman rule.)

580: (Roman rule.)

590: (Roman rule.) (Jesus Christ ministered & crucified, buried & resurrected.)

600: (Roman rule.)

Selections Relevant to Book of Daniel: Jerome, Calvin, Newton, Lowth,…

1. Jerome.
Early Christian History Commentary on Daniel Written in 408 By St. Jerome (A.D. 340- 420) Doctor Maximus Sacris Scripturis Explanandis. Translated by Gleason L. Archer, Jr. 1958. “The most important single work produced by the Church Fathers on any of the prophetic writings of the Old Testament” “And so there are many of our viewpoint who think that Domitius Nero was the Antichrist because of his outstanding savagery and depravity.” -Jerome

{{ Introduction:
“The most important single work produced by the Church Fathers on any of the prophetic writings of the Old Testament, commenting upon the original Hebrew text, and showing a complete mastery of all the literature of the Church on the subjects touched upon to the time of composition, is without question St. Jerome’s Commentary on the Book of Daniel. In Origen’s work on Daniel (Migne Series of Latin Church Fathers, Vol. XVI, pp. 2765-2928) much of the exegesis is spoiled by the author’s allegorical principles of hermeneutics, and the later commentary by Chrysostom (Vol. XVI, pp. 191-246) is more in the nature of a series of homilies than an attempt to wrestle with the problems of Daniel’s prophecies. For over eleven hundred years after its publication, all who wrote on Daniel showed themselves more indebted to this work by Jerome than to any other commentary on the Old Testament Scriptures produced in the period of the Church Fathers. It is strange that though we have some sixteen thousand pages in the Ante-Nicene, Nicene, and Post-Nicene Fathers, in the three major series of translations of patristic literature issued by Scribners some years ago, the Commentary on Daniel was passed by, as it was in the earlier series of translations undertaken by leaders of the Oxford Movement in the middle of the nineteenth century. The fifth volume of the Ante-Nicene Fathers includes fragments from the commentary on Daniel by Hippolytus, written about A.D. 230 (pp. 177-199) and these fragments contain very important material, especially on the last of the seventy weeks, Antichrist, and the author’s amazing identification of the toes of clay and iron of Daniel 2:43 with democracies; yet, the work is quite inferior in learning and insight to that of Jerome. (The doctoral dissertation by John P. O’Connell, “The Eschatology of St. Jerome,” Mundelein, Ill., 1948, passes over almost all of the eschatological interpretations of Jerome’s commentary on Daniel.) (p5)
The translation of no volume of the first six centuries of the Christian Church, appearing for the first time in the twentieth century, has quite the significance, it seems to me, that has this translation by my colleague and friend, Dr. Gleason L. Archer, of Jerome’s indispensable and ever-suggestive work on Daniel. Not even in the commentaries of Luther and Calvin on this portion of Scripture do we have anything as worthwhile as this volume of Jerome. Inasmuch as the life and work of Jerome may not be too well known to many who will be studying this volume, perhaps a brief word concerning his role in the early development of Christian thought will not be out of place. Jerome was born of Christian parents in the year A.D. 347 at Strido, near Aquileia, the capital of Venetia in central Italy. He was educated in the city of Rome, and was baptized there. Before he was twenty years of age, Jerome went to Gaul to carry on research, and returned to live in Aquileia from 370 to 373. In 374 he made an extensive trip through the Near East, including a visit to Jerusalem, and then spent five years in the desert of Chalcis, where he practiced the most intense asceticism, though, says a recent writer, “perpetually haunted by reminiscences of the world and the flesh. He took, however, his classical library with him and comforted himself with Greek and Latin; till one night he dreamed that a judge before whom he was brought punished him for being a Ciceronian and not a Christian; whereupon [in his dream apparently] he vowed to devote his intellect entirely to the Scriptures, and on waking proceeded to learn Hebrew” (Ernest Leigh-Bennett: Handbook of the Early Church Fathers, London, 1920, p. 273).
Jerome’s health declined seriously, and in 379 we find him in the great Christian city of Antioch where, much against his will, he was ordained a priest by Paulinus. The following year he visited Constantinople, desiring to hear Gregory of Nazianzus. From 382 to 385 he resided in Rome, and became a close friend of Pope Damasus. Having aroused the bitter opposition of many Roman citizens because of his insistence upon ascetic practices, winning to these a number of noble Roman ladies, in 386 he left for the East and took up residence in Bethlehem, where he continued to live until his death in 420. It was here that most of his writing was done. (p6)
Jerome is famous in the history of the Christian Church for four things: He made monastic life popular in the Latin Church, though he by no means originated monasticism, of course, and he did not found an order, such as the Benedictine or Franciscan. His letters are certainly the finest gems of autobiography produced by any Christian, at least in the first millennium of the Church. It is to Jerome that we owe the great Vulgate, completed in 404, which became the standard Bible for the Western Church, and remains such. “In that work he produced what must be numbered among the supreme achievements of the Christian mind in any age” (G. Grutzmacher, art., “Jerome,” ERE, Vol. VII, p. 500). “Here he created an object lesson on monasticism at the most sacred spot in the world, and he invited the world to come and learn. And the world came, for his hostelry was continually filled with travellers from the West. In consequence there now appear a reverence for the monastic life, a reverence for sacred places, and sacred things, and a habit of pilgrimages” (Leigh-Bennett, p. 279).
The following statement on the Septuagint by a recognized contemporary authority is worth quoting: “St. Jerome was more than a channel for Greek learning. As a Hebrew scholar and humanist he brought the Bible closer to the Latin-speaking world. The Old Latin was an unliterary translation from the Septuagint; the Vulgate was based on the ‘Hebrew Truth’ as St. Jerome lovingly calls it. The language, ‘where the rustic Latin of the first Christian centuries mingles with the Hebraising Latinity of St. Jerome,’ was the beginning of a new era, when eastern poetry penetrated into the speech of the western peoples.” (Beryl Smalley: The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages, Oxford, 1941, p. 9).
Well deserved was Jerome’s title of Doctor Maximus sacris Scripturis explanandis. Even during Jerome’s lifetime, Sulpicius Severus allowed one of the disputants in his Dialogus, written about 405, to say, “I would be surprised if he (Jerome) were not already known to you through his writings, since he is read throughout the whole world.” Although they differed on many matters, Augustine confessed to Jerome, “I have not as great a knowledge of the divine Scriptures as you have, nor could I have such knowledge as I see in you.” (These two quotations are from the excellent chapter, “St. Jerome as an Exegete,” by Louis N. Hartmann, in A Monument to St. Jerome, edited by Francis X. Murphy, New York, 1952, p. 67.)….(Wilbur M. Smith, Fuller Theological Seminary, October, 1958.)” }}

{{ Prologue: (Jerome’s Preface)
(P. 491) (617-618) “Porphyry wrote his twelfth book against the prophecy of Daniel, (A) denying that it was composed by the person to whom it is ascribed in its title, but rather by some individual living in Judaea at the time of the Antiochus who was surnamed Epiphanes. He furthermore alleged that “Daniel” did not foretell the future so much as he related the past, and lastly that whatever he spoke of up till the time of Antiochus contained authentic history, whereas anything he may have conjectured beyond that point was false, inasmuch as he would not have foreknown the future. Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, made a most able reply to these allegations in three volumes, that is, the eighteenth, nineteenth, and twentieth. Appollinarius did likewise, in a single large book, namely his twenty-sixth. (B) Prior to these authors Methodius made a partial reply.
But inasmuch as it is not our purpose to make answer to the false accusations of an adversary, a task requiring lengthy discussion, but rather to treat of the actual content of the prophet’s message for the benefit of us who are Christians, I wish to stress in my Preface this fact, that none of the prophets has so clearly spoken concerning Christ as has this prophet Daniel. (619-620) For not only did he assert that He would come, a prediction common to the other prophets as well, but also he set forth the very time at which He would come. Moreover he went through the various kings in order, stated the actual number of years involved, and announced beforehand the clearest signs of events to come. And because Porphyry saw that all these things had been fulfilled and could not deny that they had taken place, he overcame this evidence of historical accuracy by taking refuge in this evasion, contending that whatever is foretold concerning Antichrist at the end of the world was actually fulfilled in the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, because of certain similarities to things which took place at his time. But this very attack testifies to Daniel’s accuracy. For so striking was the reliability of what the prophet foretold, that he could not appear to unbelievers as a predicter of the future, but rather a narrator of things already past. And so wherever occasion arises in the course of explaining this volume, I shall attempt briefly to answer his malicious charge, and to controvert by simple explanation (p. 492) the philosophical skill, or rather the worldly malice, by which he strives to subvert the truth and by specious legerdemain to remove that which is so apparent to our eyes. (p15)
I would therefore beseech you, Pammachius, as a foremost lover of learning, and Marcella, as an outstanding examplar of Roman virtue, men who are bound together by faith and blood, to lend aid to my efforts by your prayers, in order that our Lord and Savior might in His own cause and by His mind make answer through my mouth. For it is He who says to the prophet, “Open thy mouth and I will fill it” (Psalm 80:11). For if He admonishes us, when we have been hailed before judges and tribunals, not to ponder what answer we are to give to them (Luke 12), how much more is He able to carry on His own war against blaspheming adversaries and through His servants to vanquish them? For this reason a great number of the Psalms also contain that Hebrew expression, ‘lamanasseh’, rendered by the Septuagint as “To the end,” but which rather is to be understood as “For victory!” For Aquila construed it as to ‘nikopoio’, that is, “To Him who grants the victory.” Symmachus renders it as ‘epinikion’ which properly signifies “Triumph and the palm of victory.”
But among other things we should recognize that Porphyry makes this objection to us concerning the Book of Daniel, that it is clearly a forgery not to be considered as belonging to the Hebrew Scriptures but an invention composed in Greek. This he deduces from the fact that in the story of Susanna, where Daniel is speaking to the elders, we find the expressions, “To split from the mastic tree” (apo tou skhinou skhisai) and to saw from the evergreen oak (kai apo tou prinou prisai),2 (D) a wordplay appropriate to Greek rather than to Hebrew. But both Eusebius and Apollinarius have answered him after the same tenor, that the stories of Susanna and of Bel and the Dragon are not contained in the Hebrew, but rather they constitute a part of the prophecy of Habakkuk, the son of Jesus of the tribe of Levi. Just as we find in the title of that same story of Bel, according to the Septuagint, “There was a certain priest named Daniel, the son of Abda, an intimate of the King of Babylon.” And yet Holy Scripture testifies that Daniel and the three Hebrew children were of the tribe (p. 493) of Judah. (p16)
For this same reason when I was translating Daniel many years ago, I noted these visions with a critical symbol, showing that they were not included in the Hebrew. And in this connection I am surprised to be told that certain fault-finders complain that I have on my own initiative truncated the book. After all, both Origen, Eusebius and Apollinarius, and other outstanding churchmen and teachers of Greece acknowledge that, as I have said, these visions are not found amongst the Hebrews, and that therefore they are not obliged to answer to Porphyry for these portions which exhibit no authority as Holy Scripture.
I also wish to emphasize to the reader the fact that it was not according to the Septuagint version but according to the version of Theodotion himself that the churches publicly read Daniel. (A) And Theodotion, at any rate, was an unbeliever subsequent to the advent of Christ, although some assert that he was an Ebionite (621-622), which is another variety of Jew. But even Origen in his Vulgate edition (of the Greek Old Testament) placed asterisks around the work of Theodotion, indicating that the material added was missing (in the Septuagint), whereas on the other hand he prefixed obeli (i.e., diacritical marks) to some of the verses, distinguishing thereby whatever was additional material (not contained in the Hebrew). And since all the churches 3 of Christ, whether belonging to the Greek-speaking territory or the Latin, the Syrian or the Egyptian, publicly read this edition with its asterisks and obeli, let the hostile-minded not begrudge my labor, because I wanted our (Latin-speaking) people to have what the Greek-speaking peoples habitually read publicly in the regions of Aquila and Symmachus. And if the Greeks do not for all their wealth of learning despise the scholarly work of Jews, why should poverty-stricken Latins look down upon a man who is a Christian? And if my product seems unsatisfactory, at (p. 494) least my good intentions should be recognized.” (p17) }}

{{ “But now it is time for us to unfold the words of the prophet himself, not following our usual custom of setting everything forth in detail with an accompanying detailed discussion (the procedure followed in our commentary on the Twelve Minor Prophets), but rather employing a certain brevity and inserting at intervals an explanation of only those things which are obscure. In this way we hope to avoid tiring the reader with an innumerable abundance of books. And yet to understand the final portions of Daniel a detailed investigation of Greek history is necessary, that is to say, such authorities as (B) Sutorius, Callinicus, Diodorus, Hieronymus, Polybius, Posidonius, Claudius, Theon, and Andronycus surnamed Alipius, historians whom Porphyry claims to have followed, Josephus also and those whom he cites, and especially our own historian, Livy, and Pompeius Trogus, and Justinus. All these men narrate the history involved in Daniel’s final vision, carrying it beyond the time of Alexander to the days of Caesar Augustus in their description of the Syrian and Egyptian wars, i.e., those of Seleucus, Antiochus, and the Ptolemies. And if we are compelled from time to time to make mention of profane literature and speak of matters therein contained which we have formerly failed to mention, it is not by personal preference but by stark necessity, so to speak, in order to prove that those things which were foretold by the holy prophets many centuries before are actually contained in the written records of both the Greeks and Romans and of other peoples as well. (p18)
2:1. “In the second (2nd) year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar saw a dream and his spirit was terrified, and his dream fled from him.” If the three (3) lads had entered before him at the end of three years, as he himself had commanded, how is it that he is now said to have seen the dream in the second (2nd) year of his reign? The Hebrews solve the difficulty in this way, that the second (2nd) year refers here to his reign over all (627) the barbarian nations, not only Judah and the Chaldeans, but also the Assyrians and Egyptians, and the Moabites and the rest of the nations which by the permission of God he had conquered. For this reason Josephus also writes in the tenth book of the Antiquities: After the second (2nd) year from the devastation of Egypt Nebuchadnezzar beheld a marvelous dream, and “his spirit was terrified and his dream fled from him.”…. 2:4. “The Chaldeans replied to the king in Syriac.” (A) Up to this point what we have read has been recounted in Hebrew. From this point on until the vision of the third (3rd) year of King Balthasar [Belshazzar] which Daniel saw in Susa, the account is written in Hebrew characters, to be sure, but in the Chaldee language, which he here calls Syriac. (p25)
2:31-45: Let us go through the prophetic interpretation, and as we translate Daniel’s words (C), let us explain at some length the matters which he briefly states. “Now thou art the head of gold.” “The head of gold,” he says “is thou, O king.” By this statement it is clear that the first empire, the Babylonian, is compared to the most precious metal, gold. (p32) “And after thee there shall arise another empire inferior to thee, made of silver.” (The Vulgate LXX does not include “made of silver.”) That is to say, the empire of the Medes and Persians, which bears a resemblance to silver, being inferior to the preceding empire, and superior to that which is to follow. “And a third empire of bronze (the Vulgate LXX has “made of copper”), which shall rule over the entire earth.” This signifies the Alexandrian empire, and that of (p. 504) the Macedonians, and of Alexander’s successors. Now this is properly termed brazen, for among all the metals bronze possesses an outstanding resonance and a clear ring, and the blast of a brazen trumpet is heard far and wide, (634) so that it signifies not only the fame and power of the empire but also the eloquence of the Greek language. “And there shall be a fourth empire like unto iron. Just as iron breaks to pieces and overcomes all else, so it shall break to pieces and shatter all these preceding empires . …”Now the fourth empire, which clearly refers to the Romans, is the iron empire which breaks in pieces and overcomes all others. But its feet and toes are partly of iron and partly of earthenware, a fact most clearly demonstrated at the present time. For just as there was at the first nothing stronger or hardier than the Roman realm, so also in these last days there is nothing more feeble (D), since we require the assistance of barbarian tribes both in our civil wars and against foreign nations. However, at the final period of all these empires of gold and silver and bronze and iron, a rock (namely, the Lord and Savior) was cut off without hands, that is, without copulation or human seed and by birth from a virgin’s womb; and after all the empires had been crushed, He became a great mountain and filled the whole earth. This last the Jews and the impious Porphyry apply to the people of Israel, who they insist will be the strongest power at the end of the ages, and will crush all realms and will rule forever….
3:1. “Nebuchadnezzar the king made a golden statue seventy (70) [Jerome’s Translation reads ‘sexaginta’, 60 & so does Migne’s edition of Jerome’s commentary, thus Archer’s translation is mistaken here.] cubits in height and six cubits in breadth.”… . “And he set it up in the plain of Dura in the province of Babylon.” Instead of “Dura” Theodotion has “Deira,” and Symmachus has (D) “Durau,” whereas the Septuagint renders it as the common noun ‘peribolon’, a word which we might render as “game-preserve” or “enclosure.”…..
(3:22-4:3 has added stories of the 3 Hebrews in the Fiery Furnace on which Jerome translate & comments.) 4:6 (=8). “‘Then at last my associate, Daniel, (B) whose name according to the name of my ‘god’ is Belteshazzar, entered before my presence.'” With the exception of the Septuagint translators (who for some reason or other have omitted this whole passage [i.e., vv. 6-9]), the other three translators [Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion] have translated the word [i.e. ‘oh°rdn, a dubious word generally rendered as “at last” by modern translations, but here probably to be construed as “another”] as “associate” (collega). Consequently by the judgment of the teachers of the Church, the Septuagint edition has been rejected in the case of this book, and it is the translation of Theodotion which is commonly read, since it agrees with the Hebrew as well as with the other translators (C). Wherefore also Origen asserts in the ninth book of the Stromata that he is discussing the text from this point on in the prophecy of Daniel, not as it appears in the Septuagint, which greatly differs from the Hebrew original, but rather as it appears in Theodotion’s edition….
5:25-28. “This is the inscription which has been set up: MANE, THECEL, PHARES. And this is the interpretation of the sentence: ‘MANE’ means that God has numbered thy kingdom and brought it to an end. ‘THECEL’ means it has been weighed in the scales and has been found deficient (Vulg.: thou hast been weighed and hast been found. .. .). ‘PHARES’ means that thy kingdom has been removed and given to the Medes and Persians.” The inscription (A) of these three words on the wall simply meant: “Mane, Thecel, Phares”; the first of which sounds forth the idea of “number,” and the second “a weighing out,” and the third “removal.” And so there was a need not only for reading the inscription but also for interpreting what had been read, in order that it might be understood what these words were announcing. That is to say, that God had numbered his kingdom and brought it to an end, and that He had seized hold upon him to weigh him in His judgment-scales, and the sword would slay him before he should meet a natural death; and that his empire would be divided among the Medes and Persians. For Cyrus, the king of the Persians, as we have already mentioned, overthrew the Chaldean Empire in alliance with Darius, his maternal uncle…..5:30-31. “On that same night Belshazzar, King of the Chaldeans, was slain, and Darius the Mede succeeded to his kingdom at the age of sixty-two. “Josephus writes in his tenth book of the Jewish Antiquities that when Babylon had been laid under siege by the Medes and Persians, that is, by Darius and Cyrus, Belshazzar, King of Babylon, fell into such forgetfulness of his own situation as to put on his celebrated banquet and drink from the vessels of the Temple, and even while he was besieged he found leisure for banqueting. From this circumstance the historical account could arise, that he was captured and slaughtered on the same night, while everyone was either terrified by fear of the vision and its interpretation, or else taken up with festivity and drunken banqueting. As for the fact that while Cyrus, King of the Persians, was the victor, and Darius was only King of the Medes, it was Darius who was recorded to have succeeded to the throne of Babylon, this was an arrangement occasioned by factors of age, family relationship, and the territory ruled over. By this I mean that Darius was sixty-two years old, and that, according to what we read, the kingdom of the Medes was more sizable than that of the Persians, and being Cyrus’s uncle, he naturally had a prior claim, and ought to have been accounted as successor to the rule of Babylon. Therefore also in a vision of Isaiah which was recited against Babylon, after many other matters too lengthy to mention, an account is given of these things which are to take place: “Behold I Myself will rouse up against them the Medes, a people who do not seek after silver nor desire gold, but who slay the very children with their arrows and have no compassion upon women who suckle their young” (B) (Isa. 13:7). And Jeremiah says: “Sanctify nations against her, even the kings of Media, and the governors thereof and all the magistrates thereof and all the land under the power thereof” (Jer. 51:28). Then follow the words: “The daughter of Babylon is like a threshing-floor during the time of its treading; yet a little while, and the time of its harvesting will come” (Jer. 51:33). And in testimony of the fact that Babylon was captured (657) during a banquet, Isaiah clearly exhorts her to battle when he writes: “Babylon, my beloved, has become a strange spectacle unto me [this rendering differs from the Hebrew original and the Septuagint, and seems altogether unjustified]: set thou the table and behold in the mirrors [the Hebrew says: “set the watch”] those who eat and drink; rise up, ye princes, and snatch up your shields!” (Isa. 21:4, 5). (p62)….
6:1 ff. “It pleased Darius to appoint over his kingdom one hundred and twenty satraps, that they might be throughout his whole kingdom; and over them there were three princes, of which Daniel was one.” Josephus, of whom we made mention above, in writing an account of this passage, put it this way: Now Darius (C), who destroyed the empire of the (p. 523) Babylonians in cooperation with his relative, Cyrus, –for they carried on the war as allies– was sixty-two years of age at the time he captured Babylon. He was the son of Astyages, and was known to the Greeks by another name. Moreover he took away the prophet Daniel with him and took him to Media, and made him one of the three princes who were in charge of his whole kingdom. Hence we see that when Babylon was overthrown, Darius returned to his own kingdom in Media, and brought Daniel along with him in the same honorable capacity to which he had been promoted by Belshazzar. There is no doubt but what Darius had heard of the sign and portent which had come to Belshazzar, and also of the interpretation which Daniel had set forth, and how he had foretold the rule of the Medes and the Persians. And so no one should be troubled by the fact that Daniel is said in one place to have lived in Darius’s reign, and in another place in the reign of Cyrus. The Septuagint rendered Darius by the name Artaxerxes. But as for the fact that a non-chronological order is followed, so that some history is narrated in the reign of Darius before material is given for Belshazzar’s reign [cf. 7:1 and 8:1, which of course follow chap. 6], whereas we are subsequently to read that he was put to death by Darius, it seems to me that the anachronism results from the fact that the author has brought all the historical portions together in immediate sequence. Therefore it is at the close of the earlier vision that he had stated: “And Darius the Mede succeeded to the realm at the age of sixty-two.” And so it was under this Darius who put Belshazzar to death that the events took place of which we are about to speak. (p63)…… 6:28. “Thereafter Daniel lived on until the reign of Darius and the reign of Cyrus the Persian.” And so the statement which we read above at the end of the first vision, “And Daniel lived until the first year of King Cyrus,” is not to be understood as defining the span of his life. In view of the fact that we read in the last vision: “In the third year of Cyrus, King of the Persians, a word was revealed to Daniel, whose surname was Belteshazzar”; this is what is meant, that up to the first year of King Cyrus, who destroyed the empire of the Chaldeans, Daniel continued in power in Chaldea, but was afterwards transferred to Media by Darius. (p70)
7:2-3: ….But as for the four beasts who came up out of the sea and were differentiated from one another, we may identify them from the angel’s discourse. “These four great beasts,” he says, “are four kingdoms which shall rise up from the earth.” And as for the four winds which strove in the great sea, they are called winds of heaven because each one of the angels does for his realm the duty entrusted to him. This too should be noted, that the fierceness and (664) cruelty of the kingdoms concerned are indicated by the term “beasts.”….. 7:5….). But as for the three rows or ranks that were in his mouth and between his teeth, one authority has interpreted this to mean that allusion was made to the fact that the Persian kingdom was divided up among three princes, just as we read in the sections dealing with Belshazzar and with Darius that there were three princes who were in charge of the one hundred and twenty satraps. But other commentators affirm that these were three kings of the Persians who were subsequent to Cyrus, and yet they fail to mention them by name (A). But we know that after Cyrus’s reign of thirty years his son Cambyses ruled among the Persians, and his brothers the magi [the plural seems unwarranted, since there was but one brother involved, namely, Smerdis], and then Darius, in the second year of whose reign the rebuilding of the Temple was commenced at Jerusalem. The fifth king was Xerxes, the son of Darius; the sixth was Artabanus [actually only the assassin of Xerxes; he never became king]; the seventh, Artaxerxes who was surnamed Makrokheir, that is Longimanus (“Long-handed”); the eighth, (B) Xerxes; the ninth, Sogdianus [the reigns of the last two totaled no more than eight months]; the tenth, Darius surnamed Nothos (“Bastard”); the eleventh, the Artaxerxes called Mnemon, that is, “The Rememberer”; the twelfth, the other Artaxerxes, who himself received the surname of Ochus; the thirteenth, Arses, the son of Ochus; and the fourteenth, Darius the son of Arsamus, who was conquered by Alexander, the king of the Macedonians. How then can we say that these were three kings of the Persians? Of course we could select some who were especially cruel, but we cannot ascertain them on the basis of the historical accounts. Therefore the three rows in the mouth of the Persian kingdom and between its teeth we must take to be the three kingdoms of the Babylonians, the Medes, and the Persians, all of which were reduced to a single realm. And as for the information, “And thus they spake to him: ‘Devour flesh in abundance,’ ” this refers to the time when in the reign of the Ahasuerus whom the Septuagint calls Artaxerxes, the order was given, at the suggestion of Haman the Agagite, that all the Jews be slaughtered on a single day (Esth. 3). And very properly, instead of saying, “He was devouring them” the account specifies, “Thus they spake unto him….” This shows that the matter was only attempted, and was by no means ever carried out. … 7:6: The third kingdom was that of the Macedonians,… There was never, after all, any victory won more quickly than Alexander’s, for he traversed all the way from Illyricum and the Adriatic Sea to the Indian Ocean and the Ganges River, not merely fighting battles but winning decisive victories; and in six years he subjugated to his rule a portion of Europe and all of Asia. And by the four heads reference is made to his generals who subsequently rose up as successors to his royal power, namely Ptolemy, Seleucus, Philip [i.e., Philip Arrhidaeus, an illegitimate brother of Alexander, who was proclaimed king upon Alexander’s death, but never exercised genuine power, and died after seven years], and Antigonus [the precursor of Seleucus in the rule of the Asiatic portion of Alexander’s empire]. “And power was given to it” shows that the empire did not result from Alexander’s bravery but from the will of God…. 7:7… The fourth empire is the Roman Empire, which now occupies the entire world,…”. ..and it had ten horns.” Porphyry assigned the last two beasts, that of the Macedonians and that of the Romans, to the one realm of the Macedonians and divided them up as follows. He claimed that the leopard was Alexander himself, and that the beast which was dissimilar to the others represented the four successors of Alexander, and then he enumerates ten kings up to the time of Antiochus, surnamed Epiphanes, and who were very cruel. And he did not assign the kings themselves to separate kingdoms, for example Macedon, Syria, Asia, or Egypt, but rather he made out the various kingdoms a single realm consisting of a series. This he did of course in order that the words which were written: “.. .a mouth uttering overweening boasts” [in the last part of verse 8] might be considered as spoken about Antiochus instead of about Antichrist…. Porphyry vainly surmises that the little (p. 531) horn which rose up after the ten horns is Antiochus Epiphanes, and that the three uprooted horns out of the ten are (A) Ptolemy VI (surnamed Philometer), Ptolemy VII (Euergetes), and Artaraxias, King of Armenia. The first two of these kings died long before Antiochus was born. Against Artarxias, to be sure, we know that Antiochus indeed waged war, but also we know that Artarxias remained in possession of his original kingly authority. We should therefore concur with the traditional interpretation of all the commentators of the Christian Church, that at the end of the world, when the Roman Empire is to be destroyed, there shall be ten kings who will partition the Roman world amongst themselves. Then an insignificant eleventh king will arise, who will overcome three of the ten kings, that is, the king of Egypt, the king of [North] Africa, and the king of Ethiopia, as we shall show more clearly in our later discussion. Then after they have been slain, the seven other kings also will bow their necks to the victor. “And behold,” he continues, “there were eyes like unto human eyes in that horn.” Let us not follow the opinion of some commentators and suppose him to be either the Devil or some demon, but rather, one of the human race, in whom Satan will wholly take up his residence in bodily form. “. . .and a mouth uttering overweening boasts…” (cf. II Thess. 2). For this is the man of sin, the son (668) of perdition, and that too to such a degree that he dares to sit in the temple of God, making himself out to be like God…. 7:8… And the Ancient (C) of days is the One who, according to John (p. 532) sits alone upon His throne. Likewise the Son of man, who came unto the Ancient of days, is the same as He who, according to John, is called the Lion of the tribe of Judah (Rev. 5), the Root of David, and the titles of that sort…. 7:13-14…”. . .And He arrived unto the Ancient of days, and they brought Him before His presence, and He gave unto Him authority and honor and royal power.” All that is said here concerning His being brought before Almighty God and receiving authority and honor and royal power is to be understood in the light of the Apostle’s statement: “Who, although He was in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and was found in His condition to be as a man: He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross” (Phil. 2:6-8). And if the sect of the Arians were willing to give heed to all this Scripture with a reverent mind, they would never direct against the Son of God the calumny that He is not on an equality with God. (p80) “.. .And He is the one whom all the peoples, tribes, and language-groups shall serve. His authority is an eternal authority which shall not be removed, and His kingdom shall be one that shall never be destroyed… .” Let Porphyry answer the query of whom out of all mankind this language might apply to, or who this person might be who was so powerful as to break and smash to pieces the little horn, whom he interprets to be Antiochus? If he replies that the princes of Antiochus were defeated by Judas Maccabaeus, then he must explain how Judas could be said to come with the clouds of heaven like unto the Son of man, and to be brought unto the Ancient of days, and how it could be said that authority and royal power was bestowed upon him, and that all (671) peoples and tribes and language-groups served him, and that his power is eternal and not terminated by any conclusion (p. 534)…. 7:17-18… “. . .And they shall possess the kingdom unto eternity, even forever and ever. …” If this be taken to refer to the Maccabees, the advocate of this position should explain how the kingdom of the Maccabees is of a perpetual character. (p81) 7:25. Verse 25. “And he shall utter (variant: “he utters”) speeches against the Lofty One.” Or else, as Symmachus has rendered it: “He utters speeches like God,” so that one who assumes the authority of God will also arrogate to himself the words of divine majesty. “. . .And he shall crush the saints of the Most High, and will suppose himself to be able to alter times and laws.” The Antichrist will wage war against the saints and will overcome them; and he shall exalt himself to such a height of arrogance (A) as to attempt changing the very laws of God and the sacred rites as well. He will also lift himself up against all that is called God, subjecting all religion to his own authority. “. . .And they shall be delivered into his hand for a time, and times, and half a time.” “Time” is equivalent to “year.” The word “times,” according to the idiom of the Hebrews (who also possess the dual number) represents “two years.” [The Aramaic original here, according to the Massoretic vowel pointing, has the plural ending —-iyn, not the dual ending —-ayin. To be sure, the consonantal text could also be pointed as dual.] The half a year signifies “six months.” During this period [3 1/2 years] the saints are to be given over to the power of the Antichrist, in order that those Jews might be condemned who did not believe the truth but supported a lie. The Savior also speaks of this period in the Gospel, saying: “Unless those days had been cut short, no flesh would be saved” (Matt. 24:22). In the final vision we shall assert the inappropriateness of this period to Antiochus. 7:26-27… This refers to Antichrist, that is, to the little horn which uttered the lofty words, for his kingdom is to be permanently destroyed… Here the reference is to Christ’s empire, which is eternal. 7:28. “Thus far is the end of the word.” That is, “the end of that word and discourse which the Lord revealed to me in this present vision.” “. ..I, Daniel, was much troubled with my thoughts (B), and my countenance was altered within me; but I preserved the word in my heart.” Up to this point the Book of Daniel was written in the Chaldee and Syriac language. All the rest that follows up to the very end of the volume we read in Hebrew. (p82)
8:3… He calls Darius, Cyrus’s uncle, a ram. He reigned over the Medes after his father, Astyages. And the one horn which was higher than the other, and growing still larger, signified Cyrus himself, who succeeded his maternal grandfather, Astyages, and reigned over the Medes and Persians along with his uncle, Darius, whom the Greeks called Cyaxeres. 8:4. “After this I saw the ram pushing with its horns westward (D) and northward and southward….” Not that he saw the ram itself, that is, the ram of Cyrus or Darius, but rather the ram of the same kingdom as theirs, that is, the second Darius, who was the last king of the Persian power, and who was overcome by the king of the Macedonians, Alexander the son of Philip. And as to the fact that Darius was a very powerful and wealthy king, both the Greek and the Latin and the barbarian historical accounts so relate. (p84) 8:5. “And I myself understood. …” On the basis of the previous visions which had symbolized the second kingdom by the ram and the he-goat, Daniel now also understood that he was looking at the empire of the Medes and Persians. “And behold, there was a he-goat which was coming from the West above the surface of the whole earth, and yet without touching the ground. …” So that no one will think that I am attaching a private interpretation to this, let us simply repeat the words of Gabriel as he explained the prophet’s vision. He said, “The ram whom thou sawest to possess two horns is the king of the Medes and Persians.” This was, of course, Darius the son of Arsames, in whose reign the kingdom of the Medes and Persians was destroyed. “There was in addition a he-goat, who was coming from the west,” and because of his extraordinary speed he appeared not to touch the ground. This was Alexander, the king of the Greeks, who after the overthrow of Thebes took up arms against the Persians. Commencing the conflict at the Granicus River, he conquered the generals of Darius and finally smashed against (674) the ram himself and broke in pieces his two horns, the Medes and the Persians. Casting him beneath his feet, he subjected both horns to his own authority. “And (he had) a large horn. …” refers to the first king, Alexander himself. When he died in Babylon at the age of thirty-two, his four generals rose up in his place and divided his empire among themselves. For Ptolemy, the son of Lagos, seized Egypt; the Philip who was also called Aridaeus (var.: Arius), the (half-) brother of Alexander took over Macedonia; Seleucus Nicanor took over Syria, Babylonia, and all the kingdoms of the East; and Antigonus ruled over Asia Minor. “But (they shall not rise up) with his power” (chap. 8:22), since no one was able to equal the greatness of Alexander himself. “And a long time afterward” there shall arise “a king of Syria who shall be of shameless countenance and shall understand (evil) counsels,” even Antiochus Epiphanes, the son of the Seleucus who was also called Philopator. 8:9. After he had been a hostage to Rome, and had without the knowledge of the Senate obtained rule by treachery, Antiochus fought with Ptolemy Philometor, that is, “against the South” and against Egypt; and then again “against the East,” and against those who were fomenting revolution in Persia. At the last he fought against the Jews and captured Judea, entering into Jerusalem and setting up in the Temple of God the statue of Jupiter Olympius. “…and against the power of heaven,” that is, against the children of Israel, who were protected by the assistance of angels. He pushed his arrogance to such an extreme that he subjected the majority of the saints to the worship of idols, as if he would tread the very stars beneath his feet. And thus it came to pass that he held the South and the East, that is, Egypt and Persia, under his sway.
(p85)
8:11-12. And as for the statement, “And he glorified himself even against the Prince of Power,” this means that he lifted himself up against God and persecuted His saints. He even took away the endelekhismos or “continual offering” which was customarily sacrificed in the morning and at even, and he prevailed to the casting down of the “place of His sanctuary.” And he did not do this by his own prowess, but only “on account of the sins of the people.” And thus it came to pass that truth was prostrated upon the ground, and as the worship of idols flourished, the religion of God suffered an eclipse.
8:13. “And I heard one of the saints speaking, and one saint said to another saint (I do not know which one), who was conversing with him.” Instead of “another one which one I do not know” –the rendering of Symmachus (p. 537) (A) (tini pote) which I too have followed– Aquila and (675) Theodotion, and the Septuagint as well, have simply put the Hebrew word (p-l-m-n-y) ‘phelmoni’ (B) itself. Without specifying the angel’s name, I should say that the author indicated some one of the angels or other in a general way.
“‘How long shall be the vision concerning the continual sacrifice and the sin of the desolation that is made, and the sanctuary and the strength be trodden under foot?'” One angel asks another angel for how long a period the Temple is by the judgment of God to be desolated under the rule of Antiochus, King of Syria, and how long the image of Jupiter is to stand in God’s Temple (according to his additional statement: “… and the sanctuary and the strength be trodden under foot?”). (p86)
8:14. And he answered him, ” ‘Until the evening and the morning, until two thousand three hundred days (C); and then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'” If we read the Books of Maccabees and the history of Josephus, we shall find it there recorded that in the one hundred and forty-third (143rd) year after the Seleucus who first reigned in Syria after the decease of Alexander, Antiochus entered Jerusalem, and after wreaking a general devastation he returned again in the third (3rd) year and set up the statue of Jupiter in the Temple. Up until the time of Judas Maccabaeus, that is, up until the one hundred and eighth year (108th), Jerusalem lay waste over a period of six (6) years, and for three (3) [of those] years the Temple lay defiled; making up a total of two thousand three hundred (2300) days plus three months. [At least that is what the text seems to say, following the present word-order. Actually the three months should be added to the six years in order to come out to a total of approximately 2300 days.] At the end of the period the Temple was purged. Some authorities read two hundred (200) instead of two thousand three hundred (2300), in order to avoid the apparent excess involved in six (6) years and three months. [Actually, however, 2200 days would come out to only six (6) years and nine days; the reasoning here seems obscure.] Most of our commentators refer this passage to the Antichrist, and hold that that which occurred under Antiochus was only by way of a type which shall be fulfilled under Antichrist. And as for the statement, “The sanctuary shall be cleansed,” this refers to the time of Judas Maccabaeus, who came from the village of Modin, and who being aided by the efforts of his brothers (D) and relatives and many of the Jewish people [defeated?] [the verb is left out] the generals of Antiochus not far above Emmaus (which is now called Nicopolis). And hearing of this, Antiochus, who had risen up against the Prince of princes, that is, against the Lord of lords and King of kings, was earnestly desirous of despoiling the temple of Diana which was located in Elimais, in the Persian district, because it possessed valuable votive offerings. And when he there lost his army, he was destroyed without hands, that is to say, he died of grief. As for the mention of evening and morning [in that fourteenth verse], this signifies the succession of day and night….. 8:16-17….Inasmuch as Ezekiel and Daniel and Zechariah behold themselves to be often in the company of angels, they were reminded of their frailty, lest they should be lifted up in pride and imagine themselves to partake of the nature or dignity of angels. Therefore they are addressed as sons of men, in order that they might realize that they are but human beings.
9:1-2. “In the first year of the Darius who was the son of Ahasuerus of the race of the Medes and who reigned over (678) the kingdom of the Chaldeans, in the first year of his reign. …” This is the Darius who in cooperation with Cyrus conquered the Chaldeans and Babylonians. We are not to think of that other Darius in the second year of whose reign the Temple was built (as Porphyry supposes in making out a late date for Daniel); nor are we to think of the Darius who was vanquished by Alexander, the king of the Macedonians. He therefore adds the name of his father and also refers to his victory, inasmuch as he was the first of the race of the Medes to overthrow the kingdom of the Chaldeans. He does this to avoid any mistake in the reading which might arise from the similarity of the name. (p90)
9:24-27. ” ‘Seventy (70) weeks are shortened upon thy people and upon thy holy city, (C) that transgression may be finished, and sin may have an end, and iniquity may be abolished, and everlasting justice may be brought to bear, and that the vision and prophecy may be fulfilled that the Holy One of the saints may be anointed. Know therefore and take note that from the going forth of the word to build up Jerusalem again, unto Christ the prince, there shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks, and the street shall be built again, and the walls, in distressing times. And after sixty-two weeks Christ shall be slain, and ((D) the people that shall deny Him) shall not be His. And a people, with their leader that shall come, shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. And the end thereof shall be devastation, and after the end of the war there shall be the appointed desolation. And he shall confirm the covenant with many in one week; and in the middle of the week both victim and sacrifice shall fail. And there shall be in the Temple the abomination of desolation, and the desolation shall continue even unto the consummation and the end.’ ” Because the prophet had said, “Thou didst lead forth Thy people, and Thy name was pronounced upon Thy city and upon Thy people,” Gabriel therefore, as the mouthpiece of God, says by implication: “By no means are they God’s people, but only thy people; nor is Jerusalem the holy city of God, but it is only a holy city unto thee, as thou sayest.” This is similar to what we read in Exodus also, when God says to Moses, “Descend, for thy people have committed sin” (Ex. 32:7). That is to say, they are not My people, for they have forsaken Me. And so, because thou dost supplicate for Jerusalem and prayest for the people of the Jews, hearken unto that which shall befall thy people in seventy (70) weeks of years, and those things which will happen to thy city. (p96)

I realize that this question has been argued over in various ways by men of greatest learning, and that each of them has expressed his views according to the capacity of his own genius. And so, because it is unsafe to pass judgment upon the opinions of the great teachers of the Church and to set one above another, I shall simply repeat the view of each, and leave it to the reader’s judgment as to whose explanation ought to be followed. In the fifth volume of his Tempora [“Chronology”], Africanus has this to say concerning the seventy (70) weeks (682) (and I quote him verbatim): “The chapter (E) which we read in Daniel concerning the seventy (70) weeks contains many remarkable details, which require too lengthy a discussion at this point; and so we must discuss only what pertains to our present task, namely that which concerns chronology. There is no doubt but what it constitutes a prediction of Christ’s advent, for He appeared to the world at the end of seventy(70) weeks. After Him the crimes were consummated and sin reached its end and iniquity was destroyed. An eternal righteousness also was proclaimed which overcame the mere righteousness of the law; and the vision and the prophecy were fulfilled, inasmuch as the Law and the Prophets endured until the time of (F) John the Baptist (Luke 16), and then the Saint of saints was anointed. And all these things were the objects of hope, prior to Christ’s incarnation, rather (p. 543) than the objects of actual possession. Now the angel himself specified seventy (70) weeks of years, that is to say, four hundred and ninety (490) years from the issuing of the word that the petition be granted and that Jerusalem be rebuilt. The specified interval began in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes, King of the Persians; for it was his cupbearer, Nehemiah (Neh. 1), who, as we read in the book of Ezra [the Vulgate reckons Nehemiah as II Esdras], petitioned the king and obtained his request that Jerusalem be rebuilt. And this was the word, or decree, which granted permission for the construction of the city and its encompassment with walls; for up until that time it had lain open to the incursions of the surrounding nations. But if one points to the command of King Cyrus, who granted to all who desired it permission to return to Jerusalem, the fact of the matter is that the high priest Jesus [Jeshua] and Zerubbabel, and later on the priest Ezra, together with the others who had been willing to set forth from Babylon with them, only made an abortive attempt to construct the Temple and the city with its walls, but were prevented by the surrounding nations from completing the task, on the pretext that the king had not so ordered. And thus the work remained incomplete until Nehemiah’s time and the twentieth (20) year of King Artaxerxes. Hence the captivity lasted for seventy (70) years prior to the Persian rule. [This last sentence is bracketed by the editor.] At this period in the Persian Empire a hundred and fifteen (115) years had elapsed since its inception, but it was the one hundred and eighty-fifth (185th) year from the captivity of Jerusalem when Artaxerxes first gave orders for the walls of Jerusalem to be built. [Actually only 141 years, the interval between 587 B.C. and 446 B.C.] Nehemiah was in charge of this undertaking, and the street was built and the surrounding walls were erected. Now if you compute (683) seventy weeks of years from that date, you can come out to the time of Christ. But if we wish to take any other date (A) as the starting point for these weeks, then the dates will show a discrepancy and we shall encounter many difficulties. For if the seventy weeks are computed from the time of Cyrus and his decree of indulgence which effectuated the release of the Jewish captives, then we shall encounter a deficit of a hundred (100) years and more short of the stated number of seventy (70) weeks [only seventy-eight (78) years, by more recent computation, for Cyrus’s decree was given in 538 B.C.]. If we reckon from the day when the angel spoke to Daniel, the deficit would be much greater [actually not more than a few months or a year]. An even greater number of years is added, if you wish to put the beginning of the weeks at the commencement of the captivity. For the kingdom of the Persians endured for two hundred and thirty (230) years until the rise of the Macedonian kingdom; then the Macedonians themselves reigned for three hundred (300) years. From that date until the sixteenth (16th) (i.e., the fifteenth (15th)) year of Tiberius Caesar, when Christ suffered death, is an interval of sixty (60) [sic!] years [reckoning from the death of Cleopatra, the last of the Macedonian Ptolemies]. All of these years added together come to the number of five hundred and ninety (590), with the result that a hundred (100) years remain to be accounted for. On the other hand, the interval from the twentieth (20th) year of Artaxerxes to the time of Christ completes the figure of seventy (70) weeks, if we reckon according to the lunar computation of the Hebrews, who did not number their months according to the movement of the sun, but rather according to the moon. For the interval from the one hundred fiftieth (150th) year of the Persian Empire, when Artaxerxes, as king thereof, attained the twentieth (20th) year of his reign (and this was the fourth (4th) year of the eighty-third (83rd) Olympiad), up until the two hundred and second (202nd) Olympiad (for it was the second (2nd) year of that Olympiad which was the fifteenth (15th) year of Tiberius Caesar) comes out to be the grand total of four hundred seventy-five (475) years. This would result in four hundred ninety (490) Hebrew years, reckoning according to the lunar months as we have suggested. For according to their (p. 544) computation, these years can be made up of months of twenty-nine (variant: twenty-eight (28)) and a half (29 1/2, 28 1/2) days each. This means that the sun, during a period of four hundred ninety (490) years, completes its revolution in three hundred sixty-five (365) days and a quarter, and this amounts to twelve (12) lunar months for each individual year, with eleven and a fourth days left over to spare. Consequently the Greeks and Jews over a period of eight (8) years insert three intercalary months (embolimoi). (684) For if you will multiply eleven and a quarter (11 1/4) days by eight (8), you will come out to ninety days (90), which equal three (3) months. Now if you divide the eight-year periods into four hundred seventy-five (475) years, your quotient will be fifty-nine (59) plus three months. These fifty-nine (59) plus eight-year periods produce enough intercalary months to make up fifteen (15) years, more or less; and if you will add these fifteen (15) years to the four hundred seventy-five (475) years, you will come out to seventy weeks (70) of years, that is, a total of four hundred and ninety years (490).” (p97-98)

Africanus has expressed his views in these very words which we have copied out. Let us pass on to Eusebius Pamphili [the famous church historian, who assumed the cognomen Pamphili in honor of his beloved mentor, Bishop Pamphilus], who in the eighth book of his Euangelike Apodeixis [the full title was Euangelikes Apodeixeos Proparaskeue or “Preparation for the Demonstration of the Gospel”; the Latin title is Praeparatio Evangelica] ventures some such conjecture as this: “It does not seem to me that the seventy (70) weeks have been divided up without purpose, in that seven (7) is mentioned first, and then sixty-two (62), and then a last (1) week is added, which in turn is itself divided into two parts. For it is written: ‘Thou shalt know and understand that from the issuing of the word (command) that the petition be granted and Jerusalem be built until Christ the Prince there shall be seven weeks and sixty-two (69) weeks.’ And after the rest which he relates in the intervening section, he states at the end: ‘He shall confirm a testimony (covenant) with many during one week.’ It is clear that the angel did not detail these things in his reply to no purpose or apart from the inspiration of God. This observation seems to require some cautious and careful reasoning, so that the reader may pay diligent attention and inquire into the cause for this division (variant: vision). But if we must express our own opinion, in conformity with the rest of the interpretation which concerns this present context, in the angel’s statement: ‘From the issuing of the word that the petition be granted and that Jerusalem be built, until the time of Christ the Prince,’ we are only to think of other princes who had charge of the Jewish people subsequent to this prophecy and subsequent to the return from Babylon. That is to say, we are to think of the ‘arkhiereis’ [high priests] and pontiffs to whom the Scripture attaches the title of christs, by reason of the fact that they have been anointed. The first of these was Jesus [Jeshua] the son of Jehozadak, the high priest, and then the rest who had that office up until the time of the advent of our Lord and Savior. And it is these who are intended by the prophet’s prediction when it states: ‘From the issuing of the word that the petition be granted and Jerusalem be built even unto Christ the Prince there shall be seven weeks, and sixty-two weeks.’ (685) That is to say, the purpose is that seven (7) weeks be counted off, and then afterward sixty-two (62) weeks, which come to a total of four hundred and eighty-three years (483) after the time of Cyrus. And lest we appear to be putting forth a mere conjecture too rashly and without testing the truth of our statements, let us reckon up those who bore office as christs over the people from the time of Jeshua, the son of Jehozadak, until the advent of the Lord; that is to say, those who were anointed for the high priesthood. First, then, as we have already stated, subsequent to Daniel’s prophecy, which occurred in the reign of Cyrus, and subsequent to the return of (p. 545) the people from Babylon, Jeshua the son of Jehozadak was the high priest, and together with Zerubbabel, son of Shealtiel, they laid the foundations of the temple. And because the undertaking was hindered by the Samaritans and the other surrounding nations, seven (7) weeks of years elapsed (that is to say, forty-nine years (49)), during which the work on the temple remained unfinished. These (7) weeks are separated by the prophecy from the remaining sixty-two (62) weeks. And lastly, the Jews also followed this view when they said to the Lord in the Gospel-narrative: ‘This temple was built over a period of forty-six years, and shalt thou raise it up in three days’ (John 2:20). For this was the number of years which elapsed between the first (1st) year of Cyrus, who granted to those Jews who so desired the permission to return to their fatherland, and the sixth (6th) year of King Darius, in whose reign the entire work upon the temple was finished. [Actually the two dates involved are 538 B.C. and 516 B.C., an interval of only twenty-two (22) years.] Furthermore Josephus added on three (3) more years, during which the ‘periboloi’ (precincts) and certain other construction left undone were brought to completion; and when these are added to the forty-six (46) years, they come out to forty-nine (49) years, or seven (7) weeks of years. And the remaining sixty-two (62) weeks are computed from the seventh (7th) year of Darius. At that time Jeshua the son of Jehozadak, and Zerubbabel (who had already reached his majority) were in charge of the people, and it was in their time that Haggai and Zechariah prophesied. After them came Ezra and Nehemiah from Babylon and constructed the walls of the city during the high priesthood of Joiakim, son of Jeshua, who had the surname of Jehozadak. After him Eliashib succeeded to the priesthood, then Joiada and Johanan after him. Following him there was Jaddua, in whose lifetime Alexander, the king of the Macedonians, founded Alexandria, (686) as (A) Josephus relates in his books of the Antiquities, and actually came to Jerusalem and offered blood-sacrifices in the Temple. Now Alexander died in the one hundred and thirteenth (113th) Olympiad, in the two hundred thirty-sixth (236th) year of the Persian Empire, which in turn had begun in the first (1st) year of the fifty-fifth (55th) Olympiad. That was the date when Cyrus, King of the Persians, conquered the Babylonians and Chaldeans. After the death of the priest Jaddua, who had been in charge of the temple in Alexander’s reign, Onias received the high priesthood. It was at this period that Seleucus, after the conquest of Babylon, placed upon his own head the crown of all Syria and Asia, in the twelfth (12th) year after Alexander’s death. Up to that time the years which had elapsed since the rule of Cyrus, when computed together, were two hundred and forty-eight (248). From that date the Scripture of the Maccabees computes the kingdom of the Greeks. Following Onias, the high priest Eleazar became head of the Jews. That was the period when the Seventy translators (Septuaginta interpretes) are said to have translated the Holy Scriptures into Greek at Alexandria. After him came Onias II, who was followed by Simon, who ruled over the people when Jesus the son of Sirach wrote the book which bears the Greek title of Panaretos (“A Completely Virtuous Man”), and which is by most people falsely attributed to Solomon. Another Onias followed him in the high priesthood, and that was the period when Antiochus was trying to force the Jews to sacrifice to the gods of the Gentiles. After the death of Onias, Judas Maccabaeus cleansed the Temple and smashed to bits the statues of the idols. His brother Jonathan followed him, (p. 546) and after Jonathan their brother Simon governed the people. By his death the two hundred and seventy-seventh (277th) year of the Syrian kingdom had elapsed, and the First Book of Maccabees contains a record of events up to that time. And so the total number of years from the first (1st) year of Cyrus, King of Persia, until the end of the First Book of Maccabees and the death of the high priest Simon is four hundred twenty-five (425). After him John [Hyrcanus] occupied the high priesthood for twenty-nine (29) years, and upon his death Aristobulus became head of the people for a (1) year and was the first man after the return from Babylon to associate with the dignity of high priesthood the authority of kingship. His successor was Alexander, who likewise was high priest and king, and who governed the people for twenty-seven (27) years. Up to this point, the number of years from the first (1st) year of Cyrus and the return of the captives who desired to come back to Judaea is to be computed at four hundred and eighty-three (483). This total is made up of the seven weeks (7) and the sixty-two (62) weeks, or sixty-nine (69) weeks altogether. And during this whole period high priests ruled over the Jewish people, and I now believe that they are those referred to as christ-princes. And when the last of them, Alexander, had died, the Jewish nation was rent in this direction and that into various factions, and was harrassed by internal seditions in its leaderless condition; and that too to such an extent that Alexandra, who was also called Salina, and who was the wife of the same Alexander, seized power and kept the high priesthood for her son, Hyrcanus. But she passed on the royal power to her other son, Aristobulus, and he exercised it for ten (10) years. But when the brothers fought with each other in civil war and the Jewish nation was drawn into various factions, then Gnaeus Pompey, the general of the Roman army, came upon the scene. Having captured Jerusalem, he penetrated even to the shrine in the temple which was called the Holy of holies. He sent Aristobulus back to Rome in chains, keeping him for his triumphal procession, and then he gave the high priesthood to his brother, Hyrcanus. Then for the first time the Jewish nation became tributary to the Romans. Succeeding him, Herod, the son of Antipater, received the royal authority over the Jews by senatorial decree, after Hyrcanus had been killed; and so he was the first foreigner to become governor of the Jews. Moreover when his parents had died, he handed over the high priesthood to his children, even though they were non-Jews, utterly contrary to the law of Moses. Nor did he entrust the office to them for long, (B) except upon their granting him favors and bribes, for he despised the commands of God’s law.” (p99-102)

The same Eusebius offered another explanation also, and if we wanted to translate it into Latin, we should greatly expand the size of this book. And so the sense of his interpretation is this, that the number of years from the sixth (6th) year of Darius, who reigned after Cyrus and his son, Cambyses, –and this was the date when the work on the temple was completed– until the time of Herod and Caesar Augustus is reckoned to be seven weeks (7) plus sixty-two (62) weeks, which make a total of four hundred eighty-three years (483). (688) That was the date when the christ, that is to say, Hyrcanus, being the last high priest of the Maccabaean line, was murdered by Herod, and the succession of high priests came to an end, so far as the law of God was concerned. It was then also that a Roman army (p. 547) under the leadership of a Roman general devastated both the city and the sanctuary itself. Or else it was Herod himself who committed the devastation, after he had through the Romans appropriated to himself a governmental authority to which he had no right. And as for the angel’s statement, “For he shall establish a compact with many for one week (variant: “a compact for many weeks”), and in the midst of the week the sacrifice and offering shall cease,” it is to be understood in this way, that Christ was born while Herod was reigning in Judaea and Augustus in Rome, and He preached the Gospel for three (3) years and six (6) months, according to John the Evangelist. And he established the worship of the true God with many people, undoubtedly meaning the Apostles and believers generally. And then, after our Lord’s passion, the sacrifice and offering ceased in the middle of the week. For whatever took place in the Temple after that date was not a valid sacrifice to God but a mere worship of the devil, while they all cried out together, “His blood be upon us and upon our children” (Matt. 27:25); and again, “We have no king but Caesar.” Any reader who is interested may look up this passage in the Chronicle of this same Eusebius, for I translated it into Latin many years ago. But as for his statement that the number of years to be reckoned from the completion of the temple to the tenth (10th) year of the Emperor Augustus, that is, when Hyrcanus was slain and Herod obtained Judaea, amounts to a total of seven (7) plus sixty-two (62) weeks, or four hundred eighty-three (483) years, we may check it in the following fashion. The building of the temple was finished in the seventy-sixth (76th) (here and in the other place read: “sixty-seventh (67th)” –Migne) Olympiad, which was the sixth (6th) year of Darius. In the third (3rd) year of the one hundred and eighty-sixth (186th) Olympiad, that is, the tenth (10th) year of Augustus, Herod seized the rule over the Jews. This makes the interval four hundred and eighty-three (483) years, reckoning up by the individual Olympiads and computing them at four (4) years each. This same Eusebius reports another view as well, which I do not entirely reject (A), that most authorities extend the one (1) [last] week of years to the sum of seventy years (70), reckoning each year as a ten-year (10 yr) period [reading the corrupt ‘upputatio’ as ‘supputatio’]. They also claim that thirty-five (35) years intervened between the passion of the Lord and the reign of Nero, and that it was at this latter date when the weapons of Rome were first (689) lifted up against the Jews, this being the half-way (1/2) point of the week of seventy years (70). After that, indeed, from the time of Vespasian and Titus (and it was right after their accession to power that Jerusalem and the temple were burned) up to the reign of Trajan another thirty-five (35) years elapsed. And this, they assert, was the week of which the angel said to Daniel: “And he shall establish a compact with many for one week.” For the Gospel was preached by the Apostles all over the world, since they survived even unto that late date. According to the tradition of the church historians, John the Evangelist lived up to the time of Trajan. Yet I am at a loss to know how we can understand the earlier seven (7) weeks and the sixty-two (62) weeks to involve seven (7) years each, and just this last one to involve ten (10) years for each unit of the seven (7), or seventy (70) years in all. (p103)

So much for Eusebius. But Hippolytus has expressed the following opinion concerning these same weeks (B): he reckons the seven (7) weeks as prior to the return of the people from Babylon, and the sixty-two (62) weeks as subsequent to their return and extending to the birth of Christ. But the dates do not (p. 548) agree at all. If indeed the duration of the Persian Empire be reckoned at two hundred and thirty (230) years, and the Macedonian Empire at three hundred (300), and the period thereafter up to the birth of the Lord be thirty (30) years, then the total from the beginning of the reign of Cyrus, King of the Persians, until the advent of the Savior will be five hundred and sixty (560) years. Moreover Hippolytus places the final (7th) week at the end of the world and divides it into the period of Elias and the period of Antichrist, so that during the [first] three and a half (3 1/2) years of the last (7th) week the knowledge of God is established. And as for the statement, “He shall establish a compact with many for a week” (Dan. 9:27), during the other three years under the Antichrist the sacrifice and offering shall cease. But when Christ shall come and shall slay the wicked one by the breath of His mouth, desolation shall hold sway till the end. (p104)
On the other hand Apollinarius of Laodicea in his investigation of the problem breaks away from the stream of the past and directs his longing desires towards the future, very unsafely venturing an opinion concerning matters so obscure. And if by any chance those of future generations should not see these predictions of his fulfilled at the time he set, then they will be forced to seek for some other solution and to convict the teacher himself of erroneous interpretation. And so, in order to avoid the appearance of slandering a man as having made a statement he never made, he makes the following assertion –and I translate him word for word: “To the period of four hundred and ninety (490) years the wicked deeds are to be confined (690) as well as all the crimes which shall ensue from those deeds. After these shall come the times of blessing, and the world is to be reconciled unto God at the advent of Christ, His Son. For from the coming forth of the Word, when Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, to the forty-ninth (49th) year, that is, the end of the seven (7) weeks, [God] waited for Israel to repent. Thereafter, indeed, from the eighth (8th) year of Claudius Caesar [i.e., 48 A.D.] onward, the Romans took up arms against the Jews. For it was in His thirtieth (30th) year, according to the Evangelist Luke, that the Lord incarnate began His preaching of the Gospel (Luke 1 [3]) [sic!]. According to the Evangelist John (John 2 and 11), Christ completed two (2) years over a period of three (3) passovers. The years of Tiberius’ reign from that point onward are to be reckoned at six (6); then there were the four (4) years of the reign of Gaius Caesar, surnamed Caligula, and eight (8) more years in the reign of Claudius. This makes a total of forty-nine (49) years, or the equivalent of seven (7) weeks of years. But when four hundred thirty-four (434) years shall have elapsed after that date, that is to say, the sixty-two (62) weeks, then [i.e. in 482 A.D.] Jerusalem and the Temple shall be rebuilt during three and a half (3 1/2) years within the final (70th) week, beginning with the advent of Elias, who according to the dictum of our Lord and Savior (Luke 1) [[sic!], that is, applying 1:17 to a future period, the 2nd Advent.] is going to come and turn back the hearts of the fathers towards their children. And then the Antichrist shall come, and according to the Apostle [reading ‘apostolum’ for ‘apostolorum’] he is going to sit in the temple of God (II Thess. 2) and be slain by the breath of our Lord and Savior after he has waged war against the saints. And thus it shall come to pass that the middle of the (70th) week shall mark the confirmation of God’s covenant with the saints, and the middle of the (70th) week in turn shall mark the issuing of the decree under the authority of Antichrist that no more sacrifices be offered. For the Antichrist shall set up the abomination of desolation, that is, an idol or statue of his own god, within the Temple. Then shall ensue the final devastation and the condemnation of the Jewish people, who after their rejection of Christ’s truth shall embrace the lie of the Antichrist. Moreover this same Apollinarius asserts that he conceived this idea about the proper dating from the fact that Africanus, (p. 549) the author of the Tempora [Chronology], whose explanation I have inserted above, affirms that the final week will occur at the end of the world. Yet, says Apollinarius, it is impossible that periods so linked together be wrenched apart, but rather the time-segments must all be joined together in conformity with Daniel’s prophecy. (p105)

The learned scholar Clement, presbyter of the church at Alexandria, regards the number of years as a matter of slight consequence, (691) asserting that the seventy (70) weeks of years were completed by the span of time from the reign of Cyrus, King of the Persians, to the reign of the Roman emperors, Vespasian and Titus; that is to say, the interval of four hundred and ninety years (490), with the addition in that same figure of the two thousand three hundred (2300) days of which we made earlier mention. He attempts to reckon in these seventy (70) weeks the ages of the Persians, Macedonians, and Caesars, even though according to the most careful computation, the number of years from the first year of Cyrus, King of the Persians and Medes, when Darius also bore rule, up to the reign of Vespasian and the destruction of the Temple amounts to six hundred and thirty (630).

When Origen came to deal with [reading ‘praefuisset’ instead of ‘profuisset’] this chapter, he urged us to seek out what information we do not possess; and because he had no leeway for allegorical interpretation, in which one may argue without constraint, but rather was restricted to matters of historical fact, he made this brief observation in the tenth volume of the Stromata: “We must quite carefully ascertain the amount of time between the first (1st) year of Darius, the son of Ahasuerus, and the advent of Christ, and discover how many years were involved, and what events are said to have occurred during them. Then we must see whether we can fit these data in with the time of the Lord’s coming.” (p106)

We may learn what Tertullian had to say on the subject by consulting the book which he wrote against the Jews (Contra Judaeos), and his remarks may be set forth in brief: “How, then, are we to show that Christ came within the sixty-two (62) (A) weeks? This calculation begins with the first (1st) year of Darius, since that was the time when the vision itself was revealed to Daniel. For he was told: ‘Understand and conclude from (B) the prophesying (692) of the command for me to give thee this reply. …’ Hence we are to commence our computation with the first (1st) year of Darius, when Daniel beheld this vision. Let us see, then, how the years are fulfilled up to the advent of Christ. Darius reigned nineteen (19) (p. 550) years; Artaxerxes forty (40) years; the Ochus who was surnamed Cyrus twenty-four years (24); (C) Argus, one (1) year. Then Darius II, who was called Melas, twenty-one (21) (D) years. Alexander the Macedonian reigned twelve (12) years. And then after Alexander (who had ruled over both the Medes and the Persians, after he had conquered them, and had established his rule in Alexandria, calling it after his own name), Soter reigned (E) there in Alexandria for thirty-five (35) years, and was succeeded by Philadelphus, who reigned for thirty-eight (38) years (F). After him Euergetes reigned for twenty-five (25) years, and then Philopator for seventeen (17) years, followed by Epiphanes for twenty-four (24) years. Furthermore the second (2nd) Euergetes ruled for twenty (20) (G) and nine (9) years, and Soter for thirty-eight (38) years. Ptolemy [sic!] for thirty-seven (37) (H) years, and Cleopatra for twenty years (25) and five (5) months (I). Furthermore Cleopatra shared the rule with Augustus for thirteen (13) years. After Cleopatra Augustus reigned forty-three (43) years more. For all of the years of the reign of Augustus were fifty-six (56) in number. And let us see (variant: we see) that in the forty-first (41st) year of the reign of Augustus, who ruled after the death of Cleopatra (J), (693) Christ was born. And this same Augustus lived on for fifteen(15) years after the time when Christ was born. And so the resultant periods of years up to the day of Christ’s birth and the forty-first (41st) year of Augustus, after the death of Cleopatra [actually only twenty-nine years after Cleopatra’s death –the language here is confusing], come to the total figure of four hundred and thirty-seven years and five months (437 yrs & 5 mnths). This means that sixty-two and a half (62 1/2) weeks were used up, or the equivalent of four hundred and thirty-seven years and six months (437 1/2 yrs), by the day when Christ was born. Then eternal righteousness was revealed, and the Saint of saints was anointed, namely Christ, and the vision and prophecy were sealed, and those sins were remitted which are allowed through faith in Christ’s name to all who believe in Him.” But what is the meaning of the statement that the “vision and prophecy are confirmed by a seal”? It means that all the prophets made proclamation concerning [Christ] Himself, saying that He was going to come and that He would have to suffer. Hence we read shortly thereafter in this Tertullian passage, “The years were fifty-six (56) in number; furthermore, Cleopatra continued to reign jointly under Augustus….” (p. 551) It was because the prophecy was fulfilled by His advent that the vision was confirmed by a seal; and it was called a prophecy because Christ Himself is the seal of all the prophets, fulfilling as He did all that the prophets had previously declared concerning Him. Of course after His advent and His passion (variant; the passion of Christ), there is no longer any vision or prophecy (variant: or prophet) which declares that Christ will come [?]. And then a little later Tertullian says, “Let us see what is the meaning of (A) the seven and a half (7 1/2) weeks, which in turn are divided up into a subsection of earlier (62) weeks; by what transaction were they fulfilled? Well, after Augustus, (B) who lived on after Christ’s birth, fifteen years elapsed. He was succeeded by Tiberius Caesar, and he held sway for twenty-two (22) years, seven (7) months and twenty-eight (28) (C) days. In the fifteenth (15th) year of his reign (D) Christ suffered, being about (694) thirty-three (33) when He suffered. Then there was Gaius Caesar, also named Caligula, who reigned for three (3) years, eight (8) months and thirteen (13) days. [Note that Claudius’ reign of 13 years is here omitted.] Nero reigned for nine (9) years, nine (9) months and thirteen (13) days. Galba ruled for seven (7) months and twenty-eight (28) (E) days; Otho for three (3) months and five (5) days; and Vitellius for eight (8) months and twenty-eight (29) (F) days. Vespasian vanquished the Jews in the first (1st) year of his reign, bringing the number of years to a total of fifty-two (52), plus six (6) months. For he ruled for eleven (11) years, and so by the date of his storming Jerusalem, the Jews had completed the seventy (70) weeks foretold by Daniel.” (p107-108)

As for the view which the Hebrews hold concerning this passage, I shall set it forth summarily and within a brief compass, leaving the credibility of their assertions to those who asserted them. And so let me put it in the form of a paraphrase (paraphrastikds) in order to bring out the sense more clearly. “O Daniel, know that from this day on which I now speak to thee (and that was the first (1st) year of the Darius who slew Belshazzar and transferred the Chaldean Empire to the Medes and Persians) unto the seventieth (70th) week of years (that is, four hundred and ninety years (490)) the following events shall befall thy people in stages [literally: part by part]. First of all, God shall be appeased by thee in view of the earnest intercession thou hast just offered Him, and sin shall be canceled out and the transgression shall come to an end. For although the city at present lies deserted and the Temple lies destroyed to its very foundations [reading fundamenta for the non-existent frudamenta], so that the nation is plunged into mourning, yet within a fairly short time it shall be restored. And not only shall it come to pass within these seventy (70) weeks that the city shall be rebuilt and the Temple restored, but also the Christ, who is the eternal righteousness, shall be born. (p. 552) And so shall the vision and the prophecy be sealed, with the result that there shall be no more any prophet to be found in Israel, and the Saint of saints shall be anointed. We read concerning Him in the Psalter: ‘Because God, even Thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil of gladness (695) above thy fellows’ (Ps. 44:8 = 45:7). And in another passage He says of Himself: ‘Be ye holy, for I also am holy’ (Lev. 19:2). Know therefore that from this day on which I speak to thee and make thee the promise by the word of the Lord that the nation shall return and Jerusalem shall be restored, there shall be sixty-two (62) weeks numbered unto the time of Christ the Prince and of the perpetual desolation of the Temple; and that there shall also be seven (7) weeks in which the two events shall take place which I have already mentioned, namely that the nation shall return and the street shall be rebuilt by Nehemiah and Ezra. And so at the end of the weeks the decree of God shall be accomplished in distressing times, when the Temple shall again be destroyed, and the city taken captive. For after the sixty-two (62) weeks the Christ shall be slain, and the nation who shall reject Him shall go out of existence” –or, as the Jews themselves put it, the kingdom of Christ which they imagined they would retain (G) shall not even be. And why do I speak of the slaying of Christ, and of the nation’s utter forfeiture of God’s help, since the Roman people were going to demolish the city and sanctuary under Vespasian, the leader who was to come? Upon his death the seven (7) weeks or forty-nine (49) years were complete, and after the city of Aelia was established upon the ruins of Jerusalem, Aelius Hadrian vanquished (H) the revolting Jews in their conflict with the general, Timus Rufus. It was at that time that the sacrifice and offering (ceased and) will continue to cease even unto the completion of the age, and the desolation is going to endure until the very end. We are not, say the Jews, greatly impressed by the fact that the seven (7) weeks are mentioned first, and afterwards the sixty-two (62), and again a single (1) week divided into two parts. For it is simply the idiomatic usage of the Hebrew language, as well as of antique Latin, that in quoting a figure, the small number is given first and then the larger. For example, we do not, according to good usage say in our language, “Abraham lived a hundred and seventy-five years (175)”; on the contrary the Hebrews say, “Abraham lived five and seventy (75) and one hundred (100) years” (I). And so the fulfilment is not to follow the literal order of the words, but it shall be accomplished in terms of the whole sum, taken together. I am also well aware that some of the Jews assert that as for the statement about the single week, (696) “He shall establish a covenant with many (p. 553) for one week,” the division is between the reigns of Vespasian and Hadrian. According to the history of Josephus, Vespasian and Titus concluded peace with the Jews for three years and six month (3 1/2 yrs). And the [other] three years and six months (3 1/2 yrs) are accounted for in Hadrian’s reign, when Jerusalem was completely destroyed and the Jewish nation was massacred in large groups at a time, with the result that they were even expelled from the borders of Judaea. This is what the Hebrews have to say on the subject, paying little attention to the fact that from the first year of Darius, King of the Persians, until the final overthrow of Jerusalem, which befell them under Hadrian, the period involved is a hundred and seventy-four (174) Olympiads or six hundred ninety-six (690) years, which total up to ninety-nine (99) Hebrew weeks plus three (3) years –that being the time when Barcochebas, the leader of the Jews, was crushed and Jerusalem was demolished to the very ground. (p109-110)

10:1. “In the third year of Cyrus, King of the Persians, a word was revealed unto Daniel, who was surnamed Belteshazzar, and it was a true word and great strength. For there is need of understanding in a vision.” And how is it that we read at the end of the first vision, “And Daniel lived until the first year of Cyrus the King”? Well then, we understand that he enjoyed his former high position among the Chaldeans and was clothed in purple and fine linen right up until the first year of King Cyrus, when Cyrus overthrew the Chaldeans, and afterwards Daniel commenced service under Darius, the son of Ahasuerus of the Median line, who reigned over the kingdom of the Chaldeans. Or else, indeed, that Darius had already died in whose first year Daniel had learned of the mystery of the seventy (70) weeks, and he is now relating that he beheld these things in the third (3rd) year of King Cyrus…. 10:21. “Nevertheless I will relate to thee what has been set down in the Scripture of truth.” That is, this is the order which the words follow. The fulfilment is still in doubt. For even though thou dost beseech the Lord (701) and I present thy prayers to Him, yet the prince of the Persians takes his stand on the opposite side, and is unwilling that thy people be freed from captivity. But because the prince of the Greeks has come, and in the meantime is contending against the prince of the Persians, and also because I have Michael there as my assistant, I shall, during their mutual conflict, report to thee the coming events which God has foretold to me and has bidden me relate to thee. And let no one be disturbed by the question as to why mention is made of the prince of the Greeks or Hellenes rather than of the Macedonians, for Alexander, king of the Macedonians, did not take up arms against the Persians until he had first overthrown Greece and subjected it to his power. “And no one is my helper in all these things except Michael, your prince.” He implies, ‘I am that angel who presents thy prayers to God, and I have no other helper in petitioning God on your behalf except the archangel Michael, to whose charge the Jewish nation has been entrusted. And meanwhile the prince of the Greeks is engaged in a common effort with me at this particular time, contending against the prince of the Persians’. We should review our ancient history and (A) consider whether by any chance that was the date of the conquest of the Persians by the Greeks. According to the Vulgate edition (of the Septuagint), this same vision is reckoned as extending to the end of the book, that is, the vision which appeared to Daniel in the third (3rd) year of Cyrus, King of the Persians. On the other hand, according to the Hebrew original, the ensuing sections are separate from this, and recorded in an inverted order. The causes for this phenomenon we have already mentioned; that is, the matters here recorded are related as having occurred in the first year of the Darius who overthrew Belshazzar, not in the third (3rd) year of Cyrus. (p117)
11:1. “And from the first year of Darius the Mede, I stood up that he might be strengthened and confirmed.” Daniel implies, “From the first year of the reign of Darius, who overthrew the Chaldeans and delivered me from the hand of my enemies to the extent of his ability (for even his sealing of the pit of lions with his signet ring was for my protection, lest my adversaries should slay me), I for my part stood before God, and I besought God’s mercy upon him, in view of the man’s love for me, in order that either he or his kingdom might be strengthened and confirmed. And since I persevered in my prayer, I was answered by God and given to understand the following information. After all, it is a customary thing (p. 558) with the prophets to bring in new speakers abruptly and without warning. So it is in Psalm Thirty-one [i.e., Thirty-two]: for when the prophet has petitioned God and said: “Thou art my refuge from my tribulation (B) which compassed me about; O Thou, who art my rejoicing, deliver me from those who now encompass me,” then God is abruptly brought in as the speaker, replying, “I will give thee understanding, and I will instruct thee in this way in which thou shalt go; I will fasten Mine eyes upon thee” (verses 7 and 8). So also here, as the prophet relates, “From the first year of Darius the Mede, I stood up and interceded that he might be strengthened and that his rule might be confirmed,” God suddenly responds:
Verse 2. “And now I shall proclaim the truth to thee.” And the meaning is this: “Because thou desirest to know what shall befall the kings of Persia, hearken thou to the order of events and hear the answer to thy request.” (p118)
“And behold, three (3) more kings shall arise in Persia, and the fourth (4th) shall be enriched exceedingly above them all, and when he shall have grown mighty through his wealth, he shall stir up all men against the kingdom of Greece.” He states that four (4) kings shall arise in Persia after Cyrus, namely Cambyses, the son of Cyrus, and the Magus named Smerdis, who married Pantaptes, the daughter of Cambyses. Then, when he was slain by seven Magi and Darius had succeeded to his throne, the same Pantaptes married Darius, and by him gave birth to Xerxes, who became a most powerful and wealthy king, and led an innumerable host against Greece and performed those deeds which are related by the Greek historians. For in the archonship of Callias he destroyed Athens by fire, and about that same time waged the war at Thermopylae and the naval battle at Salamis. It was in his time that Sophocles and Euripides became famous [hardly Euripides, whose first play was given in 455, nine years after Xerxes’ death], and Themistocles fled in exile to Persia, where he died as a result of drinking the blood of a bull. And so that writer [apparently Tertullian, cf. p. 550] is in error who records as the fourth (4th) king that Darius who was defeated by Alexander, for he was not the fourth (4th) king, but the fourteenth (14th) king of the Persians after Cyrus. It was in the seventh (7th) year of his rule that Alexander defeated and slew him. Moreover it should be observed that after he has specified four (4) kings of Persia after Cyrus, the author [i.e., Daniel] omits the nine (9) (C) others and passes right on to Alexander. For the Spirit of prophecy was not concerned about preserving historical detail but in summarizing only the most important matters. (703) (p119)
11:3-4. “But there shall rise up a strong king and shall rule with great power, and he shall do whatever he pleases. And when he shall have arisen, his kingdom shall be broken.” He clearly refers to Alexander the Great, king of the Macedonians, and son of Philip. For after he had overcome the Illyrians and Thracians, and had conquered Greece and destroyed Thebes, he crossed over into Asia. And when he had routed Darius’s generals and taken the city of Sardis, he afterwards captured India and founded the city of Alexandria. And then, when he had attained the age of thirty-two (32) and the twelfth (12th) year of his reign, he died of poison. “And it shall be divided towards the four winds of heaven, but not unto his own posterity nor according to his power with which he had borne rule.” After Alexander his kingdom was divided towards the four (p. 559) winds, namely to the east, the west, the south, and the north. In Egypt, that is in the south, Ptolemy the son of Lagos was the first to become king. In Macedonia, that is in the west, the Philip who was also called Aridaeus, a brother of Alexander, became king. The king of Syria and Babylon and the remoter regions, that is, the east, was Seleucus Nicanor. Antigonus was king of Asia Minor and Pontus and of the other provinces in that whole area, that is, in the north. So much for the various regions of the world as a whole; but from the standpoint of Judea itself, the north would be Syria and the south would be Egypt. And as for the statement, “But not unto his own posterity,” the implication is that Alexander would have no children, but rather, his kingdom would be rent asunder and fall to others who were not of his family, except of course for Philip, who kept Macedonia. Nor would it be according to the power of him who had borne rule, for the kingdom became feebler by division into four (4) parts, for they constantly fought among themselves and raged with internecine fury. (p120) “For his kingdom shall be rent in pieces (variant: destroyed), and that too among strangers besides these.” Besides the four kingdoms of Macedonia, Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt, the kingdom of the Macedonians was torn asunder among other rulers of less prominence and among petty kings. The reference here is to Perdiccas and Craterus and Lysimachus, for Cappadocia, Armenia, Bithynia, Heracleia, Bosphorus and various other provinces withdrew themselves from the Macedonian power and set up various kings for themselves.
11:5. “And the king of the South shall be strengthened.” The reference is to Ptolemy, son of Lagos, who was the first (1st) to become king in Egypt, and was a very clever, mighty and wealthy man, and possessed such power that he was able to restore Pyrrhus, King of Epirus, to his kingdom after he had been driven out, and also to seize Cyprus and Phoenicia. And after he had conquered Demetrius, the son of Antigonus, he restored to Seleucus that portion of his kingdom which Antigonus had taken away from him. He also acquired Caria and many islands, cities, and districts unnecessary to detail at this time. But no further notice is taken of the other kingdoms, Macedonia and Asia Minor, because Judaea lay in a midway position and was held now by one group of kings and now by another. And it is not the purpose of Holy Scripture to cover external history apart from the Jews, but only that which is linked up with the nation of Israel. (p121)
“And one of his princes shall prevail over him, and he shall rule with great power, for his dominion shall be great.” The person mentioned is Ptolemy Philadelphus, the second king of Egypt and the son of the former Ptolemy. It was in his reign that the Seventy (Septuaginta) translators are said to have translated the Holy Scripture into Greek. He also sent many treasures to Jerusalem for the high priest Eleazar, and votive vessels for the Temple. The curator of his library was Demetrius of Phalerum, a man of reputation among the Greeks as an orator and philosopher. Philadelphus is reported [reading narratur instead of the inappropriate narrantur] to have possessed such great power as to surpass his father Ptolemy. For history relates that he possessed two hundred thousand (200,000) infantrymen, twenty thousand (20,000) cavalry, and even two thousand (2,000) chariots and four hundred (400) elephants, which he was the first to import from Ethiopia. He also had a thousand five hundred (1,500) (p. 560) war galleys of the type now known as Liburnian, and a thousand (1,000) others for the transporting of military provisions. So great was his treasure of gold and silver that he received a yearly revenue from Egypt amounting to fourteen thousand eight hundred (14,800) talents of silver, as well as grain in the amount of five or ten hundred thousand (500,000 or 1,000,000 or 1/2 million to 1 million) artabae (a measure containing three and a half (3 1/2) modii [a modius being about three and a half (3 1/2) pecks]). (p122)
11:6. “And at the end of the years they shall be leagued together (or, as Theodotion renders: And after his years they shall be united). And the daughter of the king of the South shall come to the king of the North in order to make friendship, but she shall not obtain strength of arm nor shall her seed endure. And she herself shall be handed over, as well as her young men (Vulgate: youths) who brought her and who were strengthening her in (these) times.” As we have already said, it was Seleucus, surnamed Nicanor, who first ruled over Syria. The second king was Antiochus, who was called Soter. The third was Antiochus himself, (705) who was called Theos, that is the Divine. He was the one who waged numerous wars with Ptolemy Philadelphus, who was the second ruler in Egypt, and he also fought with all the Babylonians and the men of the East, and so after many years Ptolemy Philadelphus wished to have done with this vexatious struggle, and so he gave his daughter, named Berenice, in marriage to Antiochus, who had already had by a previous wife, named Laodice, two sons, namely Seleucus, surnamed Callinicus, and the other, Antiochus. And Philadelphus conducted her as far as Pelusium and bestowed countless thousands of gold and silver by way of a dowry, from which circumstance he acquired the nickname of phernophoros or Dowry-giver (dotalis). But as for Antiochus, even though he had said he would regard Berenice as his royal consort and keep Laodice in the status of a concubine, he was finally prevailed upon by his love for Laodice to restore her to the status of queen, along with her children. But she was fearful that her husband might in his fickleness restore Berenice to favor once more, and so she had him put to death by her servants with the use of poison. And she handed over Berenice and the son whom she had born by Antiochus to Icadio and Genneus, princes of Antiochus, and then set up her elder son, Seleucus Callinicus, as king in his father’s place. And so this is the matter referred to in this passage, namely that after many years Ptolemy Philadelphus and Antiochus Theos would conclude a friendship, and the daughter of the king of the South, that is Ptolemy, would go to the king of the North, that is Antiochus, in order to cement friendly relations between her father and her husband. And the text says that she will not be able to gain her end, nor shall her posterity remain upon the throne of Syria, but instead both Berenice and the men who had escorted her thither shall be put to death. And also the king, Antiochus, who had strengthened her, that is, through whom she could have obtained the mastery, was killed by his wife’s poison. (p123)
11:7-9. “And a plant of the bud of her roots shall arise, and he shall come with an army and shall invade the province of the king of the North. And he shall abuse them and shall prevail. And he shall also carry away captive into Egypt their gods and their sculptures and their precious vessels of gold and silver; he shall prevail against the king of the North. And the king of the South shall enter into the kingdom and shall return to his own land.” After the murder of Berenice and the death of her father, Ptolemy Philadelphus, in Egypt, her brother, who was also named Ptolemy and surnamed Euergetes, succeeded to the throne as the third of his dynasty, being in fact an offshoot of the same plant and a bud of the same root as she was, inasmuch as he was her (p. 561) brother. He came up with a great army and advanced into the province (706) of the king of the North, that is Seleucus Callinicus, who together with his mother Laodice was ruling in Syria, and abused them, and not only did he seize Syria but also took Cilicia and the remoter regions beyond the Euphrates and nearly all of Asia as well. And then, when he heard that a rebellion was afoot in Egypt, he ravaged the kingdom of Seleucus and carried off as booty forty thousand (40,000) talents of silver, and also precious vessels and images of the gods to the amount of two and a half thousand (2,500). Among them were the same images which Cambyses had brought to Persia at the time when he conquered Egypt. The Egyptian people were indeed devoted to idolatry, for when he had brought back their gods to them after so many years, they called him Euergetes (Benefactor). And he himself retained possession of Syria, but he handed over Cilicia to his friend, Antiochus, that he might govern it, and the provinces beyond the Euphrates he handed over to Xanthippus, another general.
11:10. “And his sons shall be provoked, and they shall assemble a multitude of great armies, and he shall come with haste like a flood. And he shall return and be stirred up, and he shall join battle with his army.” After the flight and death of Seleucus Callinicus, his two sons, the Seleucus surnamed Ceraunus and the Antiochus who was called the Great, were provoked by a hope of victory and of avenging their father, and so they assembled an army against Ptolemy Philopator and took up arms. And when the elder brother, Seleucus, was slain in Phrygia in the third year of his reign through the treachery of Nicanor and Apaturius, the army which was in Syria summoned his brother, Antiochus the Great, from Babylon to assume the throne. And so this is the reason why the present passage states that the two sons were provoked and assembled a multitude of very sizable armies. But it implies that Antiochus the Great came by himself from Babylon to Syria, which at that time was held by Ptolemy Philopator, the son of Euergetes and the fourth (4th) king to rule in Egypt. And after he had successfully fought with his generals, or rather had by the betrayal of Theodotius obtained possession of Syria (which had already been held by a succession of Egyptian kings), he became so emboldened by his contempt for Philopator’s luxurious manner of life and for the magical arts which he was said to employ, that he took the initiative in attempting an invasion of Egypt itself. (p124)
11:11-12. “And the king of the South, being provoked, shall go forth and shall prepare an exceeding great multitude, and a multitude shall be given into his hand. And he shall take (707) a multitude, and his heart shall be lifted up, because (Vulgate: and) he shall cast down many thousands. But he shall not prevail.” The Ptolemy surnamed Philopator, having lost Syria through the betrayal of Theodotius, gathered together a very great multitude and launched an invasion against (p. 562) Antiochus the Great, who now bears the title of king of the North, at the region where Egypt borders upon the province of Judaea. For owing to the nature of the region, this locality lies partly to the south and partly to the north. If we speak of Judaea, it lies to the north of Egypt and to the south of Syria. And so when he had joined battle near the town of Raphia at the gateway of Egypt, Antiochus lost his entire army and was almost captured as he fled through the desert. And after he had conceded the loss of Syria, the conflict was finally brought to an end upon the basis of a treaty and certain conditions of peace. And this is what the Scripture means here by the statement that Ptolemy Philopator “shall cast down many thousands” and yet shall not prevail. For he was unable to capture his adversary. The sequel now follows.
11:13-14. “And the king of the North shall return and shall prepare a much greater multitude than before, and in the end of times and years he shall come in haste with a large army and great resources. And in those times many shall rise up against the king of the South.” This indicates that Antiochus the Great, who despised the worthlessness of Ptolemy Philopator (for he had fallen desperately in love with a lute-player named Agathoclea and also her brother, retaining Agathocles himself as his concubine and afterwards appointing him as general of Egypt), assembled a huge army from the upper regions of Babylon. And since Ptolemy Philopator was now dead, Antiochus broke his treaty and set his army in motion against Philopator’s four-year-old son, who was called Epiphanes. For so great was the dissoluteness and arrogancy of Agathoclea, that those provinces which had previously been subjected to Egypt rose up in rebellion, and even Egypt itself was troubled with seditions. Moreover Philip, King of Macedon, and Antiochus the Great made peace with each other and engaged in a common struggle (708) against Agathocles and Ptolemy Eprphanes, on the understanding that each of them should annex to his own dominion those cities of Ptolemy which lay nearest to them. And so this is what is referred to in this passage, which says that many shall rise up against the king of the South, that is, Ptolemy Epiphanes, who was then a mere child. (p125)
“Moreover the children of the transgressors of thy people shall lift themselves up, that they may fulfil the vision, and then fall to ruin (Vulgate: and they shall fall to ruin).” During the conflict between Antiochus the Great and the generals of Ptolemy, Judaea, which lay between them, was rent into contrary factions, the one group favoring Antiochus, and the other favoring Ptolemy. Finally the high priest, Onias, fled to Egypt, taking a large number of Jews along with him, and was given by Ptolemy an honorable reception. (A) He then received the region known as Heliopolis, and by a grant of the king, he erected a temple in Egypt like the temple of the Jews, and it remained standing up until the reign of Vespasian, over a period of two hundred (B) and fifty (250) years. But then the city itself (C), which was known (p. 563) as the City of Onias, was destroyed to the very ground because of the war which the Jews had subsequently waged against the Romans. There is consequently no trace of either city or temple now remaining. But as we were saying, countless multitudes of Jews fled to Egypt on the occasion of Onias’s pontificate, and the land was filled with a large number from Cyrene as well. For Onias affirmed (A) that he was fulfilling the prophecy written by Isaiah: “There shall be an altar of the Lord in Egypt, and the name of the Lord shall be found in their territories” (Isa. 19:19). And so this is the matter referred to in this passage: “The sons of the transgressors of thy people,” who forsook the law of the Lord and wished to offer blood-sacrifices to God in another place than what He had commanded. They would be lifted up in pride and would boast that they were fulfilling the vision, that is, the thing which the Lord had enjoined. But they shall fall to ruin, for both temple and city shall be afterwards destroyed. And while Antiochus held Judaea, a leader of the Ptolemaic party called Scopas (B) Aetholus was sent against Antiochus, and after a bold campaign he took Judaea and took the aristocrats of Ptolemy’s party back to Egypt with him on his return. (709) (p126)
11:15-16. “And the king of the North shall come, and shall cast up a mound and capture the best fortified cities, and the arms of the South shall not withstand. And his chosen ones shall rise up to resist, and they shall have no strength. And he shall come upon him and do according to his own desire, and there shall be none to stand against his face. And he shall stand in the glorious land and it shall be consumed by his hand. “Purposing to retake Judaea and the many cities of Syria, Antiochus joined battle with Scopas, Ptolemy’s general, near the sources of the Jordan near where the city now called Paneas was founded, and he put him to flight and besieged him in Sidon together with ten thousand of his soldiers. In order to free him, Ptolemy dispatched the famous generals, Eropus, Menocles and Damoxenus (Vulgate: Damoxeus). Yet he was unable to lift the siege, and finally Scopas, overcome by famine, had to surrender and was sent away with his associates, despoiled of all he had. And as for the statement, “He shall cast up a mound,” this indicates that Antiochus is going to besiege the garrison of Scopas in the citadel of Jerusalem for a long time, while the Jews add their exertions as well. And he is going to capture other cities which had formerly been held by the Ptolemaic faction in Syria, Cilicia and Lycia (variant: Lydia). For at that time Aphrodisias, Soloe, Zephrion, Mallos, Anemurium (variant: Anemurum), Selenus, Coracesium, Coricus, Andriace, Lymira, Patara (variant: Patra), Xanthus, and finally Ephesus were all captured. These things are related by both Greek and Roman historians. And as for the statement, “And he shall stand in the glorious land, and it shall be consumed (or, finished) by his hand,” the term “glorious land,” or, as the Septuagint interprets it, “the land of desire” (that is, in which God takes pleasure) signifies Judaea, and particularly Jerusalem, to which Antiochus pursued those men of Scopas’s party who had been honorably (C) received there. Instead of the phrase, “glorious land,” as (p. 564) Aquila rendered it, Theodotion simply puts the Hebrew word itself, (D) Sabin; instead of that Symmachus translated it “land of bravery.” (p127)
11:17-19. “And he shall set his face to come and possess all his kingdom, and he shall make upright conditions with him. And he shall give him the daughter of women, that she may overthrow him” (Vulgate: it). That is to say, the intention is to overthrow him, that is, Ptolemy, or else to overthrow it, that is, his kingdom. Antiochus not only wished to take possession of Syria, Cilicia, and (710) Lycia, and the other provinces which had belonged to Ptolemy’s party, but also to extend his empire to Egypt. He therefore used the good offices of Eucles of Rhodes to betroth his daughter, Cleopatra, to young Ptolemy in the seventh year of his reign; and in his thirteenth year she was given to him in marriage, professedly endowed with all of Coele-syria and Judaea as her marriage-portion. By pleonasm she is called a daughter of women, just as the poet says: . . .Thus she spake with her mouth. . . .And with these ears did I drink in her voice. [The second line is quoted from Vergil’s Aeneid, iv, 359; the first line I have not been able to locate; neither seems to be particularly appropriate to the context.] “And she shall not stand, neither shall she be for him. And he shall turn his face to the islands and shall capture many; and she shall cause the prince of her reproach to cease, and his reproach shall be turned upon him. And he shall turn his face to the empire of his own land; and he shall stumble and fall, and shall not be found.” For he was unable to take possession of Egypt, because Ptolemy Epiphanes and his generals detected the strategem and followed a cautious policy. And besides, Cleopatra inclined more to her husband’s side than to her father’s. And so he turned his attention to Asia Minor, and by carrying on naval warfare against a large number of islands, he seized Rhodes, Samos, Colophon (variant: Colophonia and Bocla), Phocea and many other islands. But he was opposed by Lucius Scipio Nasica and also his brother, Publius Scipio Africanus, who had vanquished Hannibal. For since the consul Nasica, the brother of Africanus, was of a somewhat sluggish disposition, the Roman senate was unwilling to entrust to him a war against so mighty a king as Antiochus. Africanus therefore offered to assume the post of deputy on a voluntary basis, in order to obviate any damage that his brother might cause. Consequently Antiochus was vanquished and commanded to confine his rule to the other side of the Taurus range. And so he took refuge in Apamia and Susa and advanced to the easternmost cities of his realm [reading regni or regi]. And during a war against the Elymaeans he was destroyed together with his entire army. And so this is what the Scripture refers to in this passage, when it states that he would capture many islands, and yet because of the Roman conqueror he would lose the kingdom of Asia; and that the disgrace he had inflicted would come back upon his own head; and that in the end he would flee from Asia Minor and return to the empire of his own land, and would then stumble and fall, so that his place would not be found. (p128)
Verse 20. “And there shall stand up in his place one most vile and unworthy of kingly honor, and in a few days he shall be destroyed, not in rage nor in a battle.” The reference is to the Seleucus surnamed Philopator, (711) the son of Antiochus the Great, who during his reign performed no deeds worthy of Syria or of his father, but (p. 565) perished ingloriously without fighting a single battle. Porphyry, however, claims that it was not this Seleucus who is referred to, but rather Ptolemy Epiphanes, who contrived a plot against Seleucus and prepared an army to fight against him, with the result that Seleucus was poisoned by his own generals. They did this because when someone asked Seleucus where he was going to get the financial resources for the great enterprises he was planning, he answered that his financial resources consisted in his friends. When this remark was publicly noised abroad, the generals became apprehensive that he would deprive them of their property and for that reason did him to death by nefarious means. Yet how could Ptolemy be said to rise up in the place of Antiochus the Great, since he did nothing of the sort? This is especially improbable since the Septuagint translated: “And there shall stand up a plant from his root,” that is, “of his issue and seed,” who should deal a severe blow to the prestige of the empire; “and within a few days he shall be destroyed without wrath or battle.” The Hebrews claim that it is Trypho who was intended by the man who was most vile and unworthy of kingly honor, for as the boy-king’s guardian he seized the throne for himself. (p129)
11:24. “And there shall stand up in his place one despised, and the kingly honor shall not be given him; and he shall come privately and shall obtain the kingdom by fraud. And the arms of the fighter shall be overcome before his face and shall be broken, and the prince of the covenant as well. And after friendly advances he shall deal deceitfully with him, and shall go up and shall overcome with a small people. And he shall enter into rich and prosperous cities, and shall do things which his fathers never did, nor his fathers’ fathers. He shall scatter their spoil and their booty and their wealth, and shall undertake plots against the best fortified cities, and shall continue thus for a time.” Up to this point the historical order has been followed, and there has been no point of controversy between Porphyry and those of our side (variant: and us). But the rest of the text from here on to the end of the book he interprets as applying to the person of the Antiochus who was surnamed Epiphanes, the brother of Seleucus and the son of Antiochus the Great. He reigned in Syria for eleven years after Seleucus, and he seized Judaea, and it is under his reign that the persecution of God’s Law is related, and also the wars of the Maccabees. But those of our persuasion believe all these things are spoken prophetically of the Antichrist who is to arise in the end time. But this factor appears to them as a difficulty for our view, namely the question as to why the prophetic discourse should abruptly cease mention of these great kings and shift from Seleucus to the end of the world. The answer is that in the earlier historical account where mention was made of the Persian kings, only four kings of Persia were presented, following after Cyrus, and (712) many who came in between were simply skipped over, so as to come quickly to Alexander, king of the Macedonians. We hold that it is the practice of Scripture not to relate all details completely, but only to set forth what seems of major importance. Those of our school insist also that since many of the details which we are subsequently to read and explain are appropriate to the person of Antiochus, he is to be regarded as a type of the Antichrist, and those things which happened to him in a preliminary way are to be completely fulfilled in the case of the Antichrist. We hold that it is the habit of Holy Scripture to set forth by means of types the reality of things to come, in conformity with what is said of our Lord and Savior in the Seventy-first (71st) [i.e Seventy-second (72nd)] Psalm, a psalm which is noted at the beginning as being Solomon’s, and yet not all the statements which are made concerning can be applied to Solomon. For certainly he neither endured “together with the sun and before the moon from generation to generation,” nor did he hold sway from sea (p. 566) to sea, or from the River unto the ends of the earth; neither did all the nations serve him, nor did his name endure before the sun; neither were all the tribes of earth blessed in him, nor did all races magnify him. But in a partial way these things were set forth in advance, by shadows as it were, and by a mere symbol of the reality, in the person of Solomon, in order that they might be more perfectly fulfilled in our Lord and Savior. And so, just as the Savior had Solomon and the other saints as types of His advent, so also we should believe that the Antichrist very properly had as a type of himself the utterly wicked king, Antiochus, who persecuted the saints and defiled the Temple. Let us therefore follow along with the explanation point by point, and let us briefly observe in the case of each item what it signifies to those of the other school of thought and what it signifies to those of our school, in accordance with each of the two explanations. Our opponents say that the one who was to “stand up in the place of” Seleucus was his brother, Antiochus Epiphanes. The party in Syria who favored Ptolemy would not at first grant him the kingly honor, but he later secured the rule of Syria by a pretense of clemency. And as Ptolemy fought and laid everything waste, his arms were overcome and broken before the face of Antiochus. Now the word arms implies the idea of strength, and therefore also the host of any army is known as a hand [i.e. manus, “hand,” may also signify a “band of armed men”]. And not only does the text say that he conquered Ptolemy by fraud, but also the prince of the covenant he overcame by treachery, that is, Judas Maccabaeus. Or else this is what is referred to, that after he had secured peace with Ptolemy and he had become the prince of the covenant, he afterwards devised a plot against him. Now the Ptolemy meant here was not Epiphanes, who was the fifth Ptolemy to reign in Egypt, but Ptolemy (713) Philometor, the son of Antiochus’ sister, Cleopatra; and so Antiochus was his maternal uncle. And when after Cleopatra’s death Egypt was ruled by Eulaius, the eunuch who was Philometor’s tutor, and by Leneus, and they were attempting to regain Syria, which Antiochus had fraudulently seized, warfare broke out between the boy Ptolemy and his uncle. And when they joined battle between Pelusium and Mt. Casius, Ptolemy’s generals were defeated. But then Antiochus showed leniency towards the boy, and making a pretense of friendship, he went up to Memphis and there received the crown after the Egyptian manner. Declaring that he was looking out for the lad’s interests, he subjected all Egypt to himself with only a small force of men, and he entered into rich and prosperous cities. And so he did things which his father had never done, nor his fathers’ fathers. For none of the kings of Syria had ever laid Egypt waste after this fashion and scattered all their wealth. Moreover he was so shrewd that he even overcame by his deceit the well-laid plans of those who were the boy-king’s generals. This is the line of interpretation which Porphyry followed, pursuing the lead of (A) Sutorius with much redundancy, discoursing of matters which we have summarized within a brief compass. But the scholars of our viewpoint have made a better and correcter interpretation, stating that the deeds are to be performed by the Antichrist at the end of the world. It is he who is destined to arise from a small nation, that is from the Jewish people, and shall be so lowly and despised that kingly honor will not be granted him. But by means of intrigue and deception he shall secure the government and by him shall the arms of the fighting nation of Rome be overcome and broken. He is to effect this result by pretending to (p. 567) be the prince of the covenant, that is, of the Law and Testament of God. And he shall enter into the richest of cities and shall do what his fathers never did, nor his fathers’ fathers. For none of the Jews except the Antichrist has ever ruled over the whole world. And he shall form a design against the firmest resolves of the saints and shall do everything [he wishes] for a time, for as long as God’s will shall have permitted him to do these things. (p130-132)
11:25-26. “And his strength and his heart shall be stirred up against the king of the South with a great army. And the king of the South shall be aroused to war with many and very strong auxiliary forces; and they shall not stand, for they shall form designs against him. And they that eat bread with him shall destroy him, and his army shall be crushed, (714) and many shall fall down slain.” Porphyry interprets this as applying to Antiochus, who set forth with a great army on a campaign against his sister’s son. But the king of the South, that is the generals of Ptolemy, were also roused to war with many and very powerful auxiliary forces, but they could not stand against the fraudulent schemes of Antiochus. For he pretended to be at peace with his sister’s son and ate bread with him, and afterwards he took possession of Egypt. But those of our view with greater plausibility interpret all this as applying to the Antichrist, for he is to be born of the Jewish people and come from Babylon, and is first of all going to vanquish the king of Egypt, who is one of the three horns of which we have already spoken earlier.
Verses 27-30. “And the heart of the two kings shall be to do evil, and they speak falsehood at one table, and they shall not prosper, because as yet the end is unto another time. And he shall return into his land with much riches.” There is no doubt but what Antiochus did conclude a peace with Ptolemy and ate at the same table with him and devised plots against him, and yet without attaining any success thereby, since he did not obtain his kingdom but was driven out by Ptolemy’s soldiers. But it cannot be proved from this set of facts that the statement of this Scripture was ever fulfilled by past history, namely that there were two kings whose hearts were deceitful and who inflicted evil upon each other. Actually, Ptolemy was a mere child of tender years and was taken in by Antiochus’ fraud; how then could he have plotted evil against him? And so our party insist that all these things (A) refer to the Antichrist and to the king of Egypt whom he has for the first time overcome. (p133)
“And his heart shall be against the holy covenant, and he shall succeed and return into his own land. At the time appointed he shall return and shall come to the South; but the latter time shall not be like the former. And the galleys shall come upon him, and the Romans, and he shall be dealt a heavy blow.” Or, as another has rendered it, “… and they shall threaten him with attack.” Both the Greek and the Roman historians relate that after Antiochus had (p. 568) been expelled from Egypt and had gone back once more, he came to Judaea, that is, against the holy covenant, and that he despoiled the Temple and removed a huge amount of gold; and then, having stationed a garrison in the citadel, he returned to his own land. And then two years later he gathered an army against (715) Ptolemy and came to the South. And while he was besieging his two nephews, the brothers of Ptolemy and sons of Cleopatra, at Alexandria, some Roman envoys arrived on the scene, one of whom was Marcus (B) Popilius Laenas. And when he had found Antiochus standing on the shore and had conveyed the senatorial decree to him by which he was ordered to withdraw from those who were friends of the Roman people and to content himself with his own domain, then Antiochus delayed his reply in order to consult with his friends. But Laenas is said to have made a circle in the sand with the staff which he held in his hand, and to have drawn it around the king, saying, “The senate and people of Rome give order for you to make answer in this very spot as to what your decision is.” At these words Antiochus was greatly alarmed and said, “If this is the good pleasure of the senate and people of Rome, then I must withdraw.” And so he immediately set his army in motion. But he is said to have been dealt a heavy blow, not that he was killed but that he lost all of his proud prestige. As for the Antichrist, there is no question but what he is going to fight against the holy covenant, and that when he first makes war against the king of Egypt, he shall straightway be frightened off by the assistance (C) of the Romans. But these events were typically prefigured under Antiochus Epiphanes, so that this abominable king who persecuted God’s people foreshadows the Antichrist, who is to persecute the people of Christ. And so there are many (D) of our viewpoint who think that Domitius Nero [actually Domitius was the name of Nero’s father, Ahenobarbus] was the Antichrist because of his outstanding savagery and depravity.
“And he shall return and shall be angry at the covenant of the sanctuary, and he shall succeed; and he shall return and take thought concerning (Vulgate: against) those who have abandoned the covenant of the sanctuary.” We read of these matters at greater length in the exploits of the Maccabees (I Macc. 1), where we learn that after the Romans expelled him from Egypt, he came in anger against the covenant of the sanctuary and was welcomed by those who had forsaken the law of God and taken part in the religious rites of the Gentiles. But this is to be more amply fulfilled under the Antichrist, for he shall become angered at the covenant of God and devise plans against those whom he wishes to forsake the law of God. And so Aquila has rendered in a more significant way: (716) “And he shall devise plans to have the compact of the sanctuary abandoned.” (p134)
11:31. “And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall defile (Vulgate: that (?) they may defile) the sanctuary of strength, and they shall take away the continual sacrifice, and shall place there the abomination unto desolation.” Instead of “arms,” (E) another writer has rendered it as “seed,” so as to imply (p. 569) descendants and progeny. But those of the other viewpoint claim that the persons mentioned are those who were sent by Antiochus two years after he had plundered the Temple in order to exact tribute from the Jews, and also to eliminate the worship of God, setting up an image of Jupiter Olympius in the Temple at Jerusalem, and also statues of Antiochus himself. These are described as the abomination of desolation, having been set up when the burnt offering and continual sacrifice were taken away. But we on our side contend that all these things took place in a preliminary way as a mere type of the Antichrist, who is destined to seat himself in the Temple of God, and make himself out to be as God. The Jews, however, would have us understand these things as referring, not to Antiochus Epiphanes or the Antichrist, but to the Romans, of whom it was earlier stated, “And war galleys shall come,” whether Italian or Roman, “and he shall be humbled.” Considerably later, says the text, a king, Vespasian, shall emerge from the Romans themselves, who had come to Ptolemy’s assistance and threatened Antiochus. It is his arms or descendants who would rise up, namely his son Titus, who with his army would defile the sanctuary and remove the continual sacrifice and devote the temple to permanent desolation. By the terms ‘siim’ (Siyyim) and ‘chethim’ (Kittiym), which we have rendered as “galleys” and “Romans,” the Jews would have us understand “Italians” and “Romans.”
(p135)
11:32. “And ungodly men shall deceitfully dissemble against the covenant. But the people who know their God shall prevail and succeed.” And in Maccabees we read that there were some who, to be sure, pretended that they were custodians of God’s law, and later they came to terms with the Gentiles; yet the others adhered to their religion. But in my opinion this will take place in the time of the Antichrist, when the love of many shall wax cold. It is concerning these people that our Lord says in the Gospel, “Dost thou think that the Son of man, when He comes, will find faith upon the earth?” (Luke 18:8).
11:33. “And they that are learned among the people shall teach many and (717) they shall fall by the sword and by fire and by captivity and by spoil for many days.” The books of Maccabees relate the great sufferings the Jews endured at the hands of Antiochus and they stand as a testimony of their triumph; for they endured fire and sword, slavery and rapine, and even the ultimate penalty of death itself for the sake of guarding the law of God. But let no one doubt that these things are going to happen under the Antichrist, when many shall resist his authority and flee away in various directions. The Jews, of course, interpret these things as taking place at the destruction of the Temple, which took place under Vespasian and Titus, and they claim that there were very many of their nation who knew their Lord and were slain for keeping His law. (p136)
11:34-35. “And when they shall have fallen, they shall be relieved with a small help; and many shall be joined to them deceitfully. And some of the learned shall fall, that they may be refined as by fire and that they may be chosen and made white even to the time before appointed, because there shall yet be another time.” Porphyry thinks that the “little help” was Mattathias of the village of (variant: mountain of) Modin, for he rebelled against the generals of Antiochus and attempted to preserve the worship of the true God (I Macc. 2). He says he is called a little help because Mattathias was (p. 570) slain in battle; and later on his son Judas, who was called Maccabaeus, also fell in the struggle; and the rest of his brothers were likewise taken in by the deceit of their adversaries. Consult the books of Maccabees for the details. And all these events took place, he asserts, for the purpose of testing and choosing out the saints, that they might be made white until the time before appointed, inasmuch as victory was deferred until another time. Our writers, however, would have it understood that the small help shall arise under the reign of the Antichrist, for the saints shall gather together to resist him, and afterwards a great number of the learned shall fall. And this shall take place in order that they may be refined as by fire in the furnace, and that they may be made white and may be chosen out, until the time before determined arrives –for the true victory shall be won at the coming of Christ. Some of the Jews understand these things as applying to the princes Severus and Antoninus, who esteemed the Jews very highly. But others understand the Emperor Julian as the one referred to; for after they had been oppressed by Gaius Caesar and had steadfastly endured such suffering in the afflictions of their captivity, Julian rose up as one who pretended love for the Jews, promising that he would even offer sacrifice in their temple. They were to enjoy a little help from him, and a great number of the Gentiles (718) were to join themselves to their party, although falsely and insincerely. For it would only be for the sake of their own idolatrous religion that they would pretend friendship to the Jews. And they would do this in order that those who were approved might be made manifest. For the time of their true salvation and help will be the coming of the Christ; for the Jews mistakenly imagine (A) that he (i.e., their Messiah) is yet to come, for they are going to receive the Antichrist (when he comes) (I Cor. 11). (p137)
Verse 36. “And the king shall do according to his will, and he shall be lifted up and shall magnify himself against every god; and he shall speak arrogant words against the God of gods, and shall manage successfully until the wrath be accomplished (Vulgate: indignation); for the determination is made.” Or else, as another has translated it: “for in him shall be the consummation.” The Jews believe that this passage has reference to the Antichrist, alleging that after the small help of Julian a king is going to rise up who shall do according to his own will and shall lift himself up against all that is called god, and shall speak (B) arrogant words against the God of gods. He shall act in such a way as to sit in the Temple of God and shall make himself out to be God, and his will shall be prospered until the wrath of God is fulfilled, for in him the consummation will take place. We too understand this to refer to the Antichrist. But Porphyry and the others who follow his lead suppose the reference to be to Antiochus Epiphanes, pointing out that he did raise himself up against the worship of God, and pushed his arrogance so far as to command his own statue to be set up in the Temple in Jerusalem. And as for the subsequent statement, “And he shall manage successfully until the wrath be accomplished, for the consummation shall be in him,” they understand it to mean that his power will endure until such time as God becomes angry at him and orders him to be killed. For indeed Polybius and Diodorus, who composed the histories of the (C) Bibliothecae (Libraries), relate that Antiochus not only took measures against the God of Judaea, but also was impelled by an all-consuming avarice to attempt the plunder of the temple of (D) Diana in Elymais, because it was so wealthy. But he was so beset by the temple guard (p. 571) and the neighboring populace, and also by certain fearful apparitions, that he became demented and finally died of illness. And the historians record that this befell him because he had attempted to plunder the temple of Diana. But we for our part maintain that even though this thing befell him, it did so because he had perpetrated great cruelty upon the saints of God and had defiled His Temple. For we ought not to suppose that it was because of something he (719) only attempted to do but from which he then desisted by an act of repentance, but rather because of something he actually did he was punished. (p138)
Verses 37-39. “And he shall make no account of the god of his fathers, and he shall be engrossed in lust for women; nor shall he have regard for any of the gods, for he shall rise up against everything. But he shall worship the god Maozim in his place, and a god which his fathers knew not shall he worship with gold and silver and precious stones and things of great price. And he shall take measures to fortify Maozim, together with a strange god whom (A) he has acknowledged. And he shall increase glory and shall grant them power over many and shall divide the land as a free gift.” Instead of our rendering, the Septuagint translates: “.. .and he will not be subject to the lusts of women.” And again, instead of “the god Maozim (m’dym) [the Massoretic text has md’uzziym],” as the Hebrew has it, Aquila renders, “the God of mighty powers (fortitudinum),” whereas the Septuagint says, “the most mighty God.” But because there is an ambiguity of position in the Hebrew original of the phrase we rendered by, “And he shall be engrossed in lust for women,” Aquila renders it simply word for word (in Greek): “And he shall have no understanding with regard to the god of his fathers, and (B) in regard to the desire of women and in regard to every god he shall have no understanding”; that is (in Latin): “And concerning the god of his fathers he shall not understand, and concerning the lust for women, and concerning every god he shall not understand.” There are two interpretations current concerning these words, that he cherished lust for women, and that he cherished no lust for them. If we read it one way and understand it as an ‘apo koinou’ [the use of a common word in two different clauses]: “And he shall have no knowledge concerning a lust for women,” then it is more easily applied to the Antichrist; i.e., that he will assume a pretense of chastity in order to deceive many. But if we read it in this fashion: “And occupied with lust for women,” understanding, “…he shall be,” then it is more appropriate to the character of Antiochus. For he is said to have been an egregious voluptuary, and to have become such a disgrace to the dignity of kingship through his lewdness and seductions, that he publicly had intercourse with actresses and harlots, and satisfied his sexual passions in the presence of the people. As for the god Maozim, Porphyry has offered an absurd explanation, asserting that Antiochus’s generals set up a statue of Jupiter in the village of Modin, from which came Mattathias and his sons; moreover they compelled the Jews to offer blood-sacrifices to it, that is, to the god of Modin. The next statement, “. . .and he shall worship a god whom his fathers did not know” is more appropriate to the Antichrist than to Antiochus. For we read that Antiochus held to the religion of the (720) idols of Greece and compelled the Jews and Samaritans to worship his own gods. Likewise in regard to the statement, “…and he shall take measures to fortify Maozim, together with a strange god whom he has acknowledged; and he shall increase glory and grant them power over many, and shall divide the land as a free gift,” Theodotion has interpreted (p. 572) as follows: “And he shall conduct these affairs so as to fortify garrisons with a strange god, and with them he shall manifest and increase glory; and he shall cause them to bear rule over many and divide up the land as a free gift.” Symmachus rendered it “refuges” instead of “garrisons.” Porphyry explained this as meaning that the man is going to fortify the citadel in Jerusalem and will station garrisons in the rest of the cities, and will instruct the Jews to worship a strange god, which doubtless means Jupiter. And displaying the idol to them, he will persuade them that they should worship it. Then he will bestow upon the deluded both honor and very great glory, and he shall deal with the rest who have borne rule in Judaea, and apportion estates unto them in return for their falsehood, and shall distribute gifts. The Antichrist likewise is going to make lavish bestowal of many rewards upon those whom he has deceived, and will divide up the land to his soldiery. And those whom he will not be able to subject to himself by fear he will subject through their cupidity. (p139)
11:40,-41. “And at the predetermined time the king of the South shall war against him, and the king of the North shall come against him like a tempest with chariots, with horsemen and with a great navy; and he shall invade lands and destroy them and pass through. And he shall enter into the glorious land, and many shall fall.” Theodotion rendered: “. . .and many shall be enfeebled.” And according to Aquila, the many that fell are to be understood as cities or districts or provinces. This too is referred by Porphyry to Antiochus, on the ground that in the eleventh year of his reign he warred for a second time against his nephew, Ptolemy Philometor. For when the latter heard that Antiochus had come, he gathered many thousands of soldiery. But Antiochus invaded many lands like a mighty tempest, with his chariots and horsemen and large navy, and laid everything waste as he passed through. And he came to the glorious land, that is, Judaea, which Symmachus rendered as “land of strength.” In place of this Theodotion used the Hebrew word itself, Sabai (variants: Sabam and Saba) (sby). And Antiochus used the ruins of the wall of the city to fortify the citadel, (721) and thus he continued on his way to Egypt. But those of our viewpoint refer these details also to the Antichrist, asserting that he shall first fight against the king of the South, or Egypt, and shall afterwards conquer Libya and Ethiopia, for these constitute the three broken horns about which we read previously. And then he shall come to the land of Israel, and many cities or provinces shall be given into his hands. “And only these cities shall be saved from his hands: Edom, Moab, and the principality of the children of Ammon.” They say that in his haste to fight Ptolemy, the king of the South, Antiochus left untouched the Idumaeans, Moabites, and Ammonites, who dwelt to the side of Judaea, lest he should make Ptolemy the stronger by engaging in some other campaign. The Antichrist also is going to leave Idumaea, Moab, and the children of Ammon (i.e., Arabia) untouched, for the saints are to flee thither to the deserts.
11:42-43. “And he shall lay his hand upon the lands, and the land of Egypt shall not escape; and he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt. And likewise he shall pass through [reading transibit for transivit] (p. 573) the Libyans (Vulgate: Libya and Ethiopia) and the Ethiopians.” We read that Antiochus partially accomplished this. But as for the added detail, “He shall pass through the Libyans and Ethiopians,” our school insists that this is more appropriate to the Antichrist. For Antiochus never held Libya, which most writers understand to be North Africa, nor Ethiopia; unless, of course, his capture of Egypt involved the harrassment of those provinces of Egypt which lay in the same general region as Ethiopia, and which lay as distant neighbors to it, on the other side of the deserts. Hence there is no assertion of his conquering them, but only the statement that he passed through the Libyans and the Ethiopians. (p140)
11:44-45. “And tidings from the East and from the North shall trouble him. And he shall come thither with a great host to destroy and slay very many. And he shall pitch his tent in Apedno between (A) the two seas, upon the famous and holy mountain; and he shall come even unto its summit, and none shall help him.” Even for this passage Porphyry has some nebulous application to Antiochus, asserting that in his conflict with the Egyptians, Libyans, and Ethiopians, passing through them he was to hear of wars which had been stirred up against him in the North and the East. Thence he was to turn back and overcome the resistance of the Aradians [Aradus was an island off the coast of Phoenicia], and lay waste the entire province along the coastline of Phoenicia. (722) And then he was to proceed without delay against Artaxias, the king of Armenia, who was moving down from the regions of the East, and having slain a large number of his troops, he would pitch his tent in the place called Apedno which is located between the two broadest rivers, the Tigris and the Euphrates. But it is impossible to state upon what famous and holy mountain he took his seat, after he had proceeded to that point. After all, it cannot be shown that he took up his seat between two seas, and it would be foolish to interpret the two seas as being the two rivers of Mesopotamia. But Porphyry gets around this famous mountain by following the rendering of Theodotion, who said: “. . .upon the sacred Mount Saba between the two seas.” And even though he supposes that Saba was the name of a mountain in Armenia or Mesopotamia, he cannot explain why it was holy. [The Massoretic text has the common noun, sebiy, which means “beauty” or “honor,” and gives no room for any proper noun, Saba.] To be sure, if we assume the right of making things up, we can add the detail which Porphyry fails to mention, that the mountain, forsooth, was called holy, because it was consecrated to idols in conformity with the superstition of the Armenians. The account then says: “And he shall come even unto the summit of that same mountain,” –supposedly in the province of Elam, which is the easternmost Persian area. And there when he purposed to plunder the temple of Diana, which contained countless sums of money, he was routed by the barbarians, for they honored that shrine with a remarkable veneration. And Antiochus, being overcome with grief, died in Tabes, a town in Persia. By use of a most artificial line of argument Porphyry has concocted these details as an affront to us; but even though he were able to prove that these statements applied to Antiochus instead of the Antichrist, what does that matter [reading quid instead of the inappropriate qui] to us? For do we not on the basis of all the passages of Scripture prove the coming of Christ and the falsehood of the Antichrist? For assume that these things did refer to Antiochus, what injury does that inflict upon our religious faith? Is it not true that in the earlier vision also, (p. 574) which contained a prophecy fulfilled in Antiochus, there is some reference to the Antichrist? And so let Porphyry banish his doubts and stick to manifest facts. Let him explain the meaning of that rock which was hewn from the mountain without hands, and which grew to be a great mountain and filled the earth, and which smashed to pieces the fourfold image. And let him say who that Son of man is who is going to come with clouds and stand before the Ancient of Days and have bestowed upon him a kingdom which shall never come to an end, and who is going to be served by all [reading omnes for omnem] nations, tribes, and language-groups. (723) Porphyry ignores these things which are so very clear and maintains that the prophecy refers to the Jews, although we are well aware that they are to this very day in a state of bondage. And he claims that the person who composed the book under the name of Daniel made it all up in order to revive the hopes of his countrymen. Not that he was able to foreknow all of future history, but rather he records events that had already taken place. Thus Porphyry confines himself to false claims in regard to the final vision, substituting rivers for the sea, and positing a famous and holy mountain, Apedno (B) even though he is unable to furnish any historical source in which he has read about it. Those of our party, on the other hand, explain the final chapter of this vision as relating to the Antichrist, and stating that during his war against the Egyptians, Libyans, and Ethiopians, in which he shall smash three of the ten horns, he is going to hear that war has been stirred up against him in the regions of the North and East. Then he shall come with a great host to crush and slay many people, and shall pitch his tent in Apedno near Nicopolis, which was formerly called Emmaus, at the beginning of the mountainous region in the province of Judaea. Finally he shall make his way thence to go up to the Mount of Olives and ascend to the area of Jerusalem; and this is what the Scripture means here: “And when he has pitched his tent….” at the foothills of the mountainous province between two seas. These are, of course, that which is now called the Dead Sea on the east, and the Great Sea on the shore of which lie Caesarea, Joppa, Ashkelon, and (C) Gazae. Then he shall come up to the summit thereof, that is of the mountainous province, or the apex of the Mount of Olives, which of course is called famous because our Lord and Savior ascended from it to the Father. And no one shall be able to assist the Antichrist as the Lord vents his fury upon him. Our school of thought insists that Antichrist is going to perish in that spot from which the Lord ascended to heaven. ‘Apedno’ is a compound word, which upon analysis yields the meaning of “his throne” (the Greek thronou autou), or (in Latin) “thy throne” [or, if tui is a misprint for sui, his throne]. And the meaning is that he shall pitch his tent (D) and his throne between the seas upon the famous, holy mountain. Symmachus translated this passage (724) as follows (in Greek): “And he shall stretch out the tents of his stable between the seas in the holy mountain of power, and he shall come even unto its height”; which means in Latin: “And he shall stretch forth the pavilions of his cavalry between the seas, upon the holy mountain of power, and shall come even unto the apex of the mountain.” Theodotion (p. 575) renders it: “And he shall pitch his tent in (A) Aphedanum between the seas in the holy Mount Saba, and he shall come to the region thereof.” Aquila says: “And he shall set up the tent of his headquarters in (Greek) Aphadanon between the seas, in the glorious, holy mountain, and he shall come even unto its border.” Only the Septuagint frees itself from the problem about the name by translating: “And he shall establish his tent there between the seas and the holy mountain of desire and he shall come to the hour of his final end.” Adhering to this rendering, Apollinarius omits all mention of the name Apedno. I have gone into this matter at some length not only for the purpose of exposing Porphyry’s misrepresentation (for either he was ignorant of all these matters or else he pretended not to know them) but also to show the difficulty in Holy Scripture. And yet men who altogether lack experience lay special claim to understanding it apart from the grace of God and the scholarship of preceding generations. Now it should be observed that Hebrew has no letter P, but uses instead the letter phe, which has the force of the Greek phi. [An interesting observation, but rather puzzling. Ordinarily the Hebrew pe is spirantized only after a vowel sound, and is hard the rest of the time. It is hard and doubled in this particular word, ‘appadnow, according to the Massoretic pointing.] It is simply that in this particular place the Hebrews write the letter (B) phe, yet it is to be pronounced as p. But that the Antichrist is going to come to the summit of the holy, famous mountain and perish there is a fact upon which Isaiah expatiates more fully, saying: “The Lord shall in the holy mountain cast down the face of the ruler of the darkness which is over all races, and him who rules over all peoples, and the (C) anointing which is applied against (variant: with which he was anointed against) all the nations.” [This rather incoherent quotation varies very considerably from Jerome’s own rendering of Isaiah 25:7 in the Vulgate, and also from the Septuagint rendering. The editors were apparently so dubious about it that they failed to give the citation at all.] (P141-144)
12:1-3. “But at that time shall Michael rise up, the great prince, who stands for the children of thy people, and a time shall come such as never occurred from the time that nations began to exist even unto that time. And at that time shall thy people be saved, even everyone who shall be found written in the book. And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some unto life everlasting, and others unto reproach, that they may behold it always. But those who are instructed shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that instruct many as to righteousness, as the stars for all eternity.” Up until this point Porphyry somehow managed to maintain his position and impose upon the credulity of the naive [reading imperitis for imperitus] among our adherents as well as the poorly educated among his own. But what can he say of this chapter, in which is described the resurrection of the dead, with one group being revived for eternal life and the other group for eternal disgrace? He cannot even specify who the people were under Antiochus who shone like the brightness of the firmament, and those others who shone like the stars for all eternity. But what will pigheadedness not resort to? Like some bruised serpent, he lifts up his head as he is about to die, and pours forth his venom upon those who are themselves at the point of death. This too, he declares, was written with reference to Antiochus, for after he had invaded Persia, he left his army with Lysias, who was in charge of Antioch and Phoenicia, for the purpose of warring against the Jews and destroying their city of Jerusalem. All these details are related by Josephus, the author of the history of the Hebrews. Porphyry contends that the tribulation was such as had never previously occurred, and that a time came along such as had never been from the time that races began to exist even unto that time. But when victory was bestowed upon them, and the generals of Antiochus had been slain, and Antiochus himself had died in Persia, the people of Israel experienced salvation, (p. 576) even all who had been written down in the book of God, that is, those who defended the law with great bravery. Contrasted with them were those who proved to be transgressors of the Law and sided with the party of Antiochus. Then it was, he asserts, that these guardians of the Law, who had been, as it were, slumbering in the dust of the earth and were cumbered with a load of afflictions, and even hidden away, as it were, in the tombs of wretchedness, rose up once more from the dust of the earth to a victory unhoped for, and lifted up their heads, rising up to everlasting life, even as the transgressors rose up to everlasting disgrace. But those masters and teachers who possessed a knowledge of the Law shall shine like the heaven, and those who have exhorted the more backward peoples to observe the rites of God shall blaze forth after the fashion of the stars for all eternity. He also adduces the historical account concerning the Maccabees, in which it is said that many Jews under the leadership of Mattathias and Judas Maccabaeus fled to the desert and hid in caves and holes in the rocks, and came forth again after the victory (I Macc. 2.) These things, then, were foretold in metaphorical language (726) as if it concerned a resurrection of the dead. But the more reasonable understanding of the matter is that in the time of the Antichrist there shall occur a tribulation such as there has never been since nations began to exist. For assume that Lysias won the victory instead of being defeated, and that he completely crushed the Jews instead of their conquering; certainly such tribulation would not have been comparable to that of the time when Jerusalem was captured by the Babylonians, the Temple was destroyed, and all the people were led off into captivity. And so after the Antichrist is crushed and destroyed by the breath of the Savior’s mouth, the people written in God’s book shall be saved; and in accordance with the merits of each, some shall rise up unto eternal life and others unto eternal shame. But the teachers shall resemble the very heavens, and those who have instructed others shall be compared to the brightness of the stars. For it is not enough to know wisdom unless one also instructs others; and the tongue of instruction which remains silent and edifies no one else can receive no reward for labor accomplished. This passage is expressed by Theodotion and the Vulgate edition [of the Septuagint] in the following fashion: “And those who understand shall shine forth like the radiance of the firmament, and many of the righteous like the stars forever and ever.” Many people often ask whether a learned saint and an ordinary saint shall both enjoy the same reward and one and the same dwelling-place in heaven. Well then, the statement is made here, according to Theodotion’s rendering, that the learned will resemble the very heavens, whereas the righteous who are without learning are only compared to the brightness of the stars. And so the difference between learned godliness and mere godly rusticity shall be the difference between heaven and the stars. (p145-147)
12:4. “But Thou, O Daniel, shut up the words and seal the book, even to the time appointed. Many shall pass over, and knowledge shall be manifold.” He who had revealed manifold truth to Daniel now signifies that the things he has said are matters of secrecy, and he orders him to roll up the scroll containing his words and set a seal upon the book, with the result that many shall read it and inquire (p. 577) as to its fulfilment in history, differing in their opinions because of its great obscurity. And as for the statement, “Many shall pass over” or “go through,” this indicates that it will be read by many people. For it is a familiar expression to say: “I have gone through a book,” or, “I have passed through an historical account.” Indeed this is the idea which Isaiah also expressed in regard to the obscurity of his own book: “And the sayings of that book shall be like the words of a book that is sealed. And if they shall give it to an illiterate man, saying, ‘Read it,’ he will reply, (727) ‘I do not know how to read.’ But if they give it to a man who does know how to read and say, ‘Read the book,’ he will reply, ‘I cannot read it, because it is sealed up'” (Isa. 39:11). Also in the Revelation of John, there is a book seen which is sealed with seven seals inside and outside. And when no one proves able to break its seals, John says, “I wept sore; and a voice came to me, saying, ‘Weep not: behold the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has prevailed to open the book and break its seals'” (Rev. 5:4). But that book can be opened by one who has learned the mysteries of Scripture and understands its hidden truths, and its words which seem dark because of the greatness of the secrets they contain. He it is who can interpret the parables and transmute the letter which killeth into the spirit which quickeneth.
12:5-6. “And I Daniel looked, and behold as it were two other persons were standing, one on this side upon the river-bank, and the other upon that side, on the other bank of the river. And I said to the man that was clothed in linen, that stood upon the waters of the river, ‘How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?'” Daniel saw two angels standing on either side upon the bank of the river of Babylon. Although it is mentioned here without specifying its name, I suppose that in line with the preceding vision it would be the Tigris River, which is called Eddecel (H-d-q-l) in Hebrew. Yet Daniel does not address his question to those who were standing upon either bank, but rather to the one whom he had seen at the beginning, who was clothed in vesture of linen or byssus, which is called baddim (b-d-y-m) in Hebrew. And this same angel was standing upon the waters of the river of Babylon, treading upon them with his feet. From this fact we understand that the former pair of angels whom he saw standing upon the bank and did not question or deem worthy of interrogation were the angels of the Greeks and Persians. But this first angel was the gracious one who had presented Daniel’s prayers before God during the twenty-one days while the angel of the Persians was opposing him. And Daniel was asking him (variant: asks him) about these wonders spoken of in the present vision, as to the time when they should be accomplished. Porphyry, of course, assigns this time to the period of Antiochus, after his usual fashion, whereas we assign it to the time of Antichrist.
(p148)
12:7. “And I heard the man that was clothed in linen, that stood upon the waters of the river: when he had lifted up his right hand and his left hand to heaven and had sworn by Him that liveth (728) forever, that it should be unto a time and times and half a time.” Porphyry interprets a time and times and half a time to mean three and a half (3 1/2) years; and we for our part do not deny that this accords with the idiom of Sacred Scripture. For we read in an earlier section (p. 578) that seven (7) times passed over Nebuchadnezzar, that is, the seven (7) years of his existence as a wild beast. The expression was also used in the vision of the four (4) beasts, the lion, the bear, the leopard, and the (p149) other beast whose name was not specified but which represented the kingdom of the Romans. Right afterwards the statement is made concerning the Antichrist that (A) he will humble kings and utter speeches against the Exalted One and will crush the saints of the Most High; moreover he will imagine that he can alter times and laws. And the saints shall be turned over to his power unto a time and times and half a time. And the court will sit for judgment, in order that power may be removed and utterly broken and vanish away until the very end. And clearly the reference is to the coming of Christ and the saints when it is said: “But kingdom and power and the greatness of the kingdom which lies beneath the whole heaven shall be bestowed upon the people of the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom; and all the kings shall serve and obey Him.” If therefore the earlier references which were plainly written concerning the Antichrist are assigned by Porphyry to Antiochus and to the three and a half (3 1/2) years during which he asserts the Temple was deserted (cf. Verse 1, above), then he is under obligation to prove that the next statement, “His kingdom is eternal, and all kings shall serve and obey him,” likewise pertains to Antiochus, or else (as he himself conjectures) to the people of the Jews. But it is perfectly apparent that such an argument will never stand. We read in the books of Maccabees –and Josephus also concurs in the same opinion (Book 11, chap. 10)– that the Temple in Jerusalem lay defiled for three (3) years, and under Antiochus Epiphanes an idol of Jupiter stood within it (B); that is to say, from Chislev, the ninth (9th) month, of the one hundred forty-fifth (145th) year of the Macedonian rule until the ninth (9th) month of the one hundred forty-eighth (148th) year, which amounts to three (3) years. But under the Antichrist it is not stated that the desolation and overthrow of the holy Temple shall endure for three (3) years, but for three years and a half (3 1/2), that is, one thousand two hundred and ninety (1,290) days. “And when the scattering of the band (729) of the holy people shall be accomplished, all these things shall be fulfilled.” When it is stated that the people of God shall have been scattered –either under the persecution of Antiochus, as Porphyry claims, or of Antichrist, which we deem to be closer to fact– at that time shall all these things be fulfilled. (p149)
12:8-10. “And I heard, and understood not. And I said, ‘O my lord, what shall happen after these things?’ And he said, ‘Go, Daniel, for the words are shut up and sealed until the time (C) of the end. Many shall be chosen and made white and shall be tried as fire; and the wicked shall deal wickedly. And none of the wicked shall understand, but the learned shall understand.'” The prophet wished to comprehend what he had seen, or rather, what he had heard, and he desired to understand the reality of the things to come. For he had heard of the various wars of kings, and of battles between them, and a detailed narrative of events; but he had not heard the names of the individual persons involved. And if the prophet himself heard and did not understand, what will be the case with those men who presumptuously expound a book which has been sealed, and that too unto the time of the end, a book which is (p. 579) shrouded with many obscurities? But he comments that when the end comes, the ungodly will lack comprehension, whereas those who are learned in the teaching of God will be able to understand. “For wisdom will not enter the perverted soul, nor can it impart itself to a body which is subject to sins.” [The editors do not cite the source of this quotation [which is Wisdom of Solomon 1:4].]
12:11. “And from the time that the continual sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination unto desolation shall be set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.” Porphyry asserts that these one thousand two hundred and ninety (1290) days were fulfilled in the desolation of the Temple in the time of Antiochus, and yet both Josephus and the Book of Maccabees, as we have said before, record that it lasted for only three (3) years. From this circumstance it is apparent that the three and a half (3 1/2) years are spoken of in connection with the time of the Antichrist, for he is going to persecute the saints for three and a half (3 1/2) years, or one thousand two hundred and ninety (1290) days, and then he shall meet his fall on the famous, holy mountain. And so from the time of the removal of the ‘endelekhismos’, which we have translated as “continual sacrifice,” i.e., the time when the Antichrist shall obtain possession of the world (variant: the city) and forbid the worship (A) of God, unto the day of his death the three and a half (3 1/2) years, or one thousand two hundred and ninety days (1290), shall be fulfilled. (730). (p150)
12:12. “Blessed is he that waiteth and cometh unto a thousand three hundred and thirty-five days.” He means that he is blessed who waits for forty-five (45) days beyond the predetermined number, for it is within that period that our Lord and Savior is to come in His glory. But the reason for the forty-five (45) days of inaction after the slaying of the Antichrist is a matter which rests in the knowledge of God; unless, of course, we say that the rule of the saints is delayed in order that their patience may be tested. Porphyry explains this passage in the following way, that the forty-five (45) days beyond the one thousand two hundred and ninety (1290) signify the interval of victory over the generals of Antiochus, or the period when Judas Maccabaeus fought with bravery and cleansed the Temple and broke the idol to pieces, offering blood-sacrifices in the Temple of God. He might have been correct in this statement if the Book of Maccabees had recorded that the Temple was polluted over a period of three and a half (3 1/2) years instead of just three (3) years (I Mace. 4).
12:13. “But thou, (B) Daniel, go thy way until the time appointed, and take thy rest (Vulgate: thou shalt rest) and thou shalt stand in thy lot unto the end of the days.” Instead of this Theodotion translated it: “But go thy way and take thy rest, and thou shalt rise up again in thy turn at the end of the days.” From this remark it is demonstrated that the whole context of the prophecy has to do with the resurrection of all the dead, (p. 580) at the time when the prophet also is to rise. And it is vain for Porphyry to claim that all these things which were spoken concerning the Antichrist under the type of Antiochus actually refer to Antiochus alone. As we have already mentioned, these false claims have been answered at greater length by Eusebius of Caesarea, Apollinarius of Laodicea, and partially also by that very able writer, the martyr Methodius; and anyone who knows of these things can look them up in their writings. (C) Thus far we have been reading Daniel in the Hebrew edition; but the remaining matter to the end of the book has been translated from Theodotion’s edition. (p151)
Chapters 13-14: 13:1-2. “Now there was a man that dwelt in Babylon whose name was Joakim; and he took a wife whose name was Susanna, the daughter of Helcias, a very beautiful woman and one who feared the Lord” (Vulgate: God). Having expounded to the best of my ability the contents of the book of Daniel according to the Hebrew, I shall briefly set forth the comments of Origen concerning the stories of Susanna and of Bel contained (731) in the Tenth Book of his Stromata. These remarks are from him (D) and one may observe them in the appropriate sections (i.e., of Origen’s work)….. 13:54 ff. “‘Tell me under which tree thou sawest them conversing with each other.’ And he answered, ‘Under the mastic tree.’ And Daniel said to him, ‘Well hast thou lied against thine own head; for behold, the angel of God, having received His sentence from Him, shall cleave thee in twain.’ And a little while later the other elder said, ‘Under the holm tree.’ And Daniel said to him, ‘Well hast thou lied against thine own head; but the angel of the Lord waiteth with a sword to sever thee in twain.'” Since the Hebrews reject the story of Susanna, asserting that it is not contained in the Book of Daniel, we ought to investigate carefully the names of the trees, the ‘skhinos’ and the ‘prinos’, which the Latins interpret as “holm-oak” and “mastic-tree,” and see whether they exist among the Hebrews and what their derivation is –for example, as “cleavage” [Latin (scissio) is derived from “mastic” [Greek skhinos], and “cutting” or “sawing” [Latin sectio, serratio] is derived from “holm tree” [Greek prinos, which resembles the Greek word for “to saw”: prio] in the language of the Greeks. But if no such derivation can be found, then we too are of necessity forced to agree with the verdict of those who claim that this chapter [Greek pericope] was originally composed in Greek, because it contains Greek etymology not found in Hebrew. [That is, because Daniel twice makes a sinister wordplay based upon the Greek names of these two trees, and a similar pun could not be made out from the Hebrew names, if any, of these trees, the story itself could never have been composed in Hebrew.] But if anyone can show (A) that the derivation of the ideas of cleaving and severing from the names of the two trees in question is valid in Hebrew, then we may accept this scripture also as canonical. (p156) 14:… This objection is easily solved by asserting that this particular story is not contained in the Hebrew of the Book of Daniel. If, however, anyone should be able to prove that it belongs (B) in the canon, then we should be obliged to seek out some answer to this objection.”
[Jerome’s additional Notes & all of Migne’s Notes are omitted in these selections.] }}

About mjmselim

Male, 65, born in Jamaica, USA since 1961, citizen in 2002; cobbler for 40 plus years, Christian since 1969; married to same wife since 1979; 6 daughters and 2 sons, with 7 grandkids. Slowly adapting to the digital world of computers and internet; hobby in digital editing.
This entry was posted in Bible & Scripture, Bible Reflections, Christian Doctrine, Christian Reflections, Prophecy, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s