Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 10:1
In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing [was] true, but the time appointed [was] long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision.
1. king of Persia ] A title, not borne by the Persian kings while the Persian empire still lasted, though often given to them after it had passed away, as a mark of distinction from the Greek rulers who then followed [356] .
[356] See the writer’s Introduction, p. 511 f. with p. 512, n. 3 (ed. 6, p. 545, with p. 546, n. *).
a thing ] or, a word: cf. Dan 9:23 b, and (Aram.) Dan 4:33.
Belteshazzar ] See on Dan 1:7; and cf. Dan 5:12.
and the word (is) true, and a great warfare ] The revelation is true (cf. Dan 8:26), and relates besides to a period of severe hardship and trial. ‘Warfare’ has the same figurative sense which it has in Isa 40:2; Job 7:1; Job 14:14 (A.V. in Job, as here, appointed time, following the interpretation of Kimchi; R.V. rightly warfare, figuratively of the hardships of life).
and he understood &c.] and he gave heed unto the word.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
In the third year of Cyrus, king of Persia – In regard to Cyrus, see the notes at Isa 41:2. In Dan 1:21, it is said that Daniel continued even unto the first year of king Cyrus. But it is not necessarily implied in that passage that he died then. It may mean only that he continued in authority, and was employed, in various ways, as a public officer, until that time. See the note at that passage. For anything that appears, he may have lived several years after, though, for causes now unknown, he may have retired from the court after the accession of Cyrus. This vision may have occurred when he was no longer a public officer, though the whole narrative leads us to suppose that he had not lost his interest in the affairs of the Jewish people. He may have retired on account of age, though his declining years would be naturally devoted to the welfare of his people, and he would embrace any opportunity which he might have of doing them good.
A thing was revealed unto Daniel – A revelation was made to him. The occasion on which it was done is stated in the next verse. It was when he was earnestly engaged in prayer for his people, and when his mind was deeply anxious in regard to their condition.
Whose name was called Belteshazzar – See the notes at Dan 1:7. The name Belteshazzar was probably that by which he was known in Babylon, and as this prophecy was perhaps published in his own time, the use of this name would serve to identify the author. The name Daniel would have been sufficient to give it currency and authority among his own countrymen.
And the thing was true – That is, it would be certainly accomplished. This expresses the deep conviction of the writer that what was revealed in this vision would certainly come to pass. In his own mind there was no doubt that it would be so, though the time extended through many years, and though it could not be expected that it would be complete until long after his own death. Perhaps the declaration here is designed to bring the weight of his own authority and his well-known character to pledge his own word, that what is here said would be accomplished; or, as we should say, to stake his veracity as a prophet and a man, on the fulfillment of what he had affirmed. Such an assertion might be of great use in consoling the minds of the Jews in the troubles that were to come upon their nation.
But the time appointed was long – Margin, great. There is considerable variety in the translation and interpretation of this passage. The Latin Vulgate renders it, fortitudo magna. The Greek, And the power was great. The Syriac, And the discourse was apprehended with great effort, but he understood the vision. Luther, And it was of great matters. Lengerke, And the misery (Elend) is great; that is, the distress of the people. Bertholdt renders it, Whose contents pertained to great wars. This variety of interpretation arises from the word rendered in our version the time appointed – tsaba’. This word properly means an army, host, as going forth to war; then the host of angels, of the stars, and hence, God is so often called Jehovah of hosts. Then the word means warfare, military service, a hard service, a season of affliction or calamity. See the notes at Job 7:1. It seems to me that this is the meaning here, and that Gesenius (Lexicon) has correctly expressed the idea: And true is the edict, and relates to long warfare; that is, to many calamities to be endured. It was not a thing to be soon accomplished, nor did it pertain to peaceful and easy times, but it had reference to the calamities, the evils, and the hardships of wars – wars attended with the evils to which they are usually incident, and which were to be conducted on a great scale. This interpretation will accord with the details in the following chapters.
And he understood the thing … – This seems to be said in contradistinction to what had occurred on some other occasions when the meaning of the vision which he saw was concealed from him. Of this he says he had full understanding. The prophecy was, in fact, more clearly expressed than had been usual in the revelations made to Daniel, for this is almost entirely a historical narrative, and there could be little doubt as to its meaning.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Dan 10:1-21
In the third year of Cyrus.
The Vision on the Banks of the Hiddekels
The law of gradual development seems to pervade the government of God, and may be treated alike in the material and spiritual departments of his administration. The revelation which God has given to men has grown into its completeness. The primal promise to our common parents in paradise, was the first faint ray that emanated from the common sun of righteousness; but as the morning of the race wore on, that solitary beam expanded, through the Abrahamic covenant, the Mosaic economy and the prophetic writings, unto at length, foreheralded by the Baptist as the morning star, the Divine luminary arose with healing m his wings. What was thus characteristic of revelation as a whole is equally apparent in the communications made to individual prophets. Daniel, in this wonderful series of predictions, goes on from the general to the particular, and brings in at every stop new details by which accuracy may be tested, and by which, if his writings stand the ordeal which they have themselves prepared, his inspiration may be abundantly established. The date of the present revelation was the third year of Cyrus, King of Persia. This, therefore, is the last communication which he gave to his people, and the last glimpse which we get of himself. He had not set out, probably on account of his extreme old age, with the exiles who returned to Jerusalem after the issuing of the edict of Cyrus. The testimony of tradition is that Daniel died at Susa . . . This description of the conflicts in the spirit-world between the rival angels foreshadows the opposition encountered by Zerubbabel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and their compatriots during the reigns of the Persian kings, Darius, Hystaspis, Xerxes, and Artaxerxes, and also that which, at a later time, the descendants of the restorers of Jerusalem met with at the hands of the Syrian representatives of the Greek Empire. The prophecy in the eleventh chapter may be divided into three parts, increasing in circumstantiality as they advance. There is first, a brief description of the Persian and the Greek Empires; then a sketch of the more important events in the struggles between the kings of Syria and Egypt; and third, a detailed and minute account of the character and actions of Antiochus Epiphanes . . . It remains that I should look for a moment at the opinion of those who believe that we have in this prediction a reference to the Antichrist of the New Testament as well as to Antiochus. For such an idea we can find no sure foundation. There is nothing in the chapter to indicate that a transition from one subject to another has been made. Some refer the prophecy to the Papacy; but it is a question not yet settled whether the papacy really is the Antichrist of the New Testament. Learn from this portion,
1. That God prepares his people for special trial by special grace. His assistance is ever beforehand with our emergency. The relation of this portion of Gods word to the circumstances of the people under Antiochus is precisely that of all his promises to our trials, temptations, and necessities. Every promise of God is a prophecy.
2. That faith in the Invisible is essential to our getting the full benefit of Scripture. Much may be gained from it in history and in morals, even if we should repudiate everything that is supernatural in its pages. To obtain the utmost benefit from its words, we must accept its revelation of that which is hidden from mortal sight. The promises of Jesus are not to us like the legacies of one long dead. They are the assurances of a living and present, though unseen friend, and when so accepted they are full of power. The Bible will be to us no better than the moral maxims of Antoninus or Epictetus, unless we receive its revelation of the unseen in connection with its forecasts of prophecy and promise. (William M. Taylor, D..D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER X
This and the two following chapters give an account of Daniel’s
last vision, wherein the succession of the Persian and Grecian
monarchies is described, together with the wars that should
take place between Syria and Egypt under the latter monarchy.
The last part of the vision (from Da 11:36)
seems to relate chiefly to the persecutions of the Church in
the times of Antichrist, till it be purified from all its
pollutions; after which will follow that glorious kingdom of
the saints spoken of in the seventh and eighth chapters. This
chapter begins with an account of Daniel’s fasting and
humiliation, 1-3.
Then we have a description of the Divine person who appeared to
the prophet, not unlike him who appeared to the apostle in the
isle of Patmos, 4-21. See Re 1:10-16.
NOTES ON CHAP. X
Verse 1. In the third year of Cyrus] Which answers to the first year of Darius the Mede.
The time appointed was long] vetsaba gadol, but the warfare long; there will be many contentions and wars before these things can be accomplished.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
This fell out in the thirty-first year, which was the last year of the kingdom of Persia, but the third year after his seizure and monarchy of Babylon; indeed it is said, Dan 1:21, that Daniel continued to the first year of Cyrus, i.e. in his place of honour, but he lived much longer.
A thing was revealed unto Daniel; revealed by an angel from heaven, not in a dream, or in any more obscure and uncertain way, but plainly. This chapter is but a general preface to what is more particularly declared in the next chapter.
Belteshazzar: by this name Daniel was famous among many people, and they took notice of him by his honourable place, name, and prophecy.
The thing was true; both in the matter, and that which was truly to come to pass, not feigned, nor a bare conjecture, it was truth. The time appointed was long, i.e. for three hundred years space, as was said, Dan 8:26, or to the end of Antiochuss persecution, or of the world, Dan 12:2.
And he understood the thing and the vision. This is doubled, to beget the greater credit, and assurance of the truth of it.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
1. third year of Cyrustwoyears after Cyrus’ decree for the restoration of the Jews had goneforth, in accordance with Daniel’s prayer in Da9:3-19. This vision gives not merely general outlines, orsymbols, but minute details of the future, in short, anticipativehistory. It is the expansion of the vision in Da8:1-14. That which then “none understood,” he sayshere, “he understood”; the messenger being sent to him forthis (Dan 10:11; Dan 10:14),to make him understand it. Probably Daniel was no longer in office atcourt; for in Da 1:21, it issaid, “Daniel continued even unto the first year of King Cyrus”;not that he died then. See on Da1:21.
but the time appointed waslongrather, “it (that is, the prophecy) referred to greatcalamity” [MAURER];or, “long and calamitous warfare” [GESENIUS].Literally, “host going to war”; hence, warfare, calamity.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia,…. Not of his being king of Persia only, but of the Medopersian empire, after he had subdued the Babylonian empire, and annexed it to his dominions; and this is not to be reckoned from the time of his taking Babylon, and putting the government of it into the hands of his uncle Darius, with whom he jointly reigned; but from the time of his uncle’s death, when he was sole monarch of the whole empire: he reigned thirty years, as Cicero t, from a Persian writer, relates; which is to be reckoned from the time of his being appointed by his uncle commander-in-chief of the Persian and Median armies; for from his taking of Babylon to his death were but nine years; and so many years the canon of Ptolemy assigns to his reign, taking in the two years he reigned with his uncle; for from his being sole monarch, after the death of Cyaxares, or Darius the Mede his uncle, were but seven years; which, according to Xenophon u, is the whole of his reign, who reckons it from thence; and it was in the third of these that Daniel had the visions contained in this and the two following chapters; which, according to Bishop Usher w, and Dean Prideaux x, was in the year of the world 3470 A.M. and 534 B.C. Mr. Bedford y places it in the year 533 B.C.: how long Daniel lived after this is not certain; very probably he died quickly after, since he must be in a very advanced age; for the third year of Cyrus being the seventy third of his captivity, as Dean Prideaux z observes; and if he was eighteen years of age, as that learned man thinks is the least that can be supposed at the time of his carrying into Babylon, he must have been in the ninety first year of his age at this time; or if he was but fifteen years of age at that time, which is the opinion of Aben Ezra on Da 1:4, he must be in the third year of Cyrus eighty eight years of age. The Dutch annotators observe, that Daniel lived in the court of Babylon above seventy seven years, which will carry his age to a greater length still. Jarchi on Da 1:21 asserts Daniel to be the same with Hatach in Es 4:5 and so the Targum on that place, who lived in the times of Ahasuerus, supposed to be Xerxes: now between the third of Cyrus, and the beginning of Xerxes’s reign, is mentioned a space of seventy one years, which, added to the least number eighty eight before given, will make Daniel now to be one hundred and fifty nine years old, when Ahasuerus or Xerxes began his reign; which is not only an age unfit for such business Hatach was employed in; but agrees not with the period in which Daniel lived, when it was not usual for men to live so long, and must be exploded as fabulous:
a thing was revealed unto Daniel; a secret, which he otherwise could never have known; and which was a singular favour to him, and showed him to be a friend of God, a favourite of his; and this respected the Persian and Grecian monarchies; the various kings of Egypt and Syria, and what should befall them; and the times of Antiochus, and the troubles the Jews would have through him:
(whose name was called Belteshazzar); a name given him by the prince of the eunuchs; see Da 1:7:
and the thing was true; was not a false vision, a mere fancy of the brain, an empty conjecture, a delusion of the mind, like the divination and soothsaying of the Gentiles, but a real thing, that was sure and certain, and would be fulfilled, and might be depended upon: but the time appointed was long; ere the whole would be accomplished; for it reached to the times of Antiochus, three hundred years after this, yea, to the resurrection of the dead, and the end of all things: or, “a great host”, or “army” a; a vast appearance of things were represented to him; not a host of angels, as Saadiah; but a vast number of facts, like an army of them, and which respected armies and battles; or it may denote the force, power, and efficacy of the word that was true, which should not fail, but be certainly fulfilled:
and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision; that is, Daniel understood “the word” b, or words of the prophecy, in which it was expressed; they were clear and plain, and not obscure, dark, and doubtful; and he had a clear view of each of the parts of it, of the whole series of things, the connection of facts, and their dependence on one another, and their certain accomplishment; he saw them in their order, as they were presented to him in vision and prophecy; and was not at any loss about the meaning of any part of them, or the words by which they were signified.
t De Divinatione, l. 1. u Cyropaedia, l. 8. c. 45. w Annales Vet. Test. A. M. 3470. x Connexion, c. par. 1. p. 161, 162. y Scripture Chronology, p. 718. z Ut supra. (Connexion, &c. par. 1. p. 161, 162) a “et militia magna”, Pagninus, Montanus, Gejerus “militia seu belligeratio ingens”, Michaelis. b “verbum”, Pagninus, Montanus, Munster.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The Theophany – Daniel 10-11:2a
The Introduction to the Following Manifestation of God – Dan 10:1-3
This verse is to be regarded as an inscription or general statement of the substance of it. Therefore Daniel speaks of himself in the third person, as in Dan 7:1, and in the historical portions Daniel 1-6. The definition of the time, “In the first year of Cores (Cyrus) king of Persia,” refers us back to Dan 1:21, but it does not, as has been there already remarked, stand in contradiction to the first year of Cyrus named there. is the following revelation, which was communicated to the prophet not by a vision ( ), but by a manifestation of God ( ), and was given in the form of simple human discourse. The remark regarding Daniel, “whose name was Belteshazzar,” is designed only to make it obvious that the Daniel of the third year of Cyrus was the same who was carried by Babylon in the first year of Nebuchadnezzar (seventy-two years before). To the question why Daniel did not return to his native land in the first year of Cyrus, which Hitzig has thus formulated for the purpose of framing an argument against the genuineness of this prophecy – ”How could he, who was a pattern of piety (Dan 1:8; Eze 14:14), so disregard the opportunity that was offered and the summons of Isaiah (Isa 48:20; Isa 52:11.) as if he stood on the side of those who forgot the holy mountain?” (Isa 65:11) – the supposition of his advanced old age (Hv.) is no sufficient answer. For, on the contrary, Hitzig has rightly replied that old men also, such as had even seen the former temple, had returned home (Ezr 3:12), and Daniel was not so infirm as to be unable for the journey. The correct answer is rather this, that Daniel, because divine revelations had been communicated to him, had obtained a position at the court of the world-rulers in which he was able to do much for the good of his people, and might not, without a special divine injunction, leave this place; that he thus, not from indifference toward the holy mountain or from neglect of the injunctions to flee from Babylon (Isa 48:20; Isa 52:11.), but from obedience to God, and for the furtherance of the cause of His kingdom, remained at his post till the Lord His God should call him away from it.
In the second hemistich the contents of this new divine revelation are characterized. with the article points back to in the first half of the verse. Of this “word” Daniel says that it contains and . In the statement that “the thing was true,” Hitzig finds an intimation that thereby the author betrays his standpoint, namely, the time when “the thing” was realized, for Daniel could not say this before it happened. But this objection supposes that the author was a lying prophet, who spoke from his own heart (Jer 29:8, Jer 29:15). But if Daniel had actually received a “word” from God, he could before its fulfilment testify its truth. The testimony to the truth of the word here indicates, as it does in Dan 8:26 in the mouth of the angel, that the word of God now communicated to the prophet contained things which it would be difficult for the human heart to believe. The second predicate shows in what respect this is so. For that these words do not, with the lxx and Aquil., refer to what follows is obvious, as is acknowledged by all modern interpreters. , warfare, military service, then the difficulty of this service, and figuratively difficulty, afflictions of life, Job 7:1; Job 10:17, and also here. “The word is, i.e., concerns, has as its contents, great afflictions” [E.V. “the time appointed was long”].
In the last clause of this verse and are not the imperative (v. Lengerke), because a summons to give heed, or understand, would not be here in place. is a substantive, and the throwing of the accent on the penultima is occasioned by the accented which follows. is the 3rd pers. perf., not the infinitive (Hv.). Understanding was to him , by that which was seen, i.e., by the appearance described in Dan 10:5. cannot at all be referred (Klief.) to the earlier prophecies of Dan 8:7, Dan 8:9. The statement in these two passages serves for the confirmation of that which was said regarding the contents of the word from God, and stands in relation to Dan 8:27, where Daniel was troubled because no one understood the vision. He was helped out of this state of non-understanding by the following revelation, cf. Dan 10:14. But the objection that it cannot be here said that Daniel understood the word, because he himself, Dan 12:8, says that he did not understand it, has been disposed of by Kliefoth, who justly remarks that the non-understanding in Dan 12:8 regards a single point, namely, the duration of the affliction, regarding which, however, disclosures are given to the prophet in Dan 12:10. The translation: “he heard the word, and understood the vision” (Kran.), is set aside by this circumstance, that it takes in a different sense from , contrary to the parallelism of the passages.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Vision near the River Hiddekel. | B. C. 534. |
1 In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing was true, but the time appointed was long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision. 2 In those days I Daniel was mourning three full weeks. 3 I ate no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine in my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all, till three whole weeks were fulfilled. 4 And in the four and twentieth day of the first month, as I was by the side of the great river, which is Hiddekel; 5 Then I lifted up mine eyes, and looked, and behold a certain man clothed in linen, whose loins were girded with fine gold of Uphaz: 6 His body also was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude. 7 And I Daniel alone saw the vision: for the men that were with me saw not the vision; but a great quaking fell upon them, so that they fled to hide themselves. 8 Therefore I was left alone, and saw this great vision, and there remained no strength in me: for my comeliness was turned in me into corruption, and I retained no strength. 9 Yet heard I the voice of his words: and when I heard the voice of his words, then was I in a deep sleep on my face, and my face toward the ground.
This vision is dated in the third year of Cyrus, that is, of his reign after the conquest of Babylon, his third year since Daniel became acquainted with him and a subject to him. Here is,
I. A general idea of this prophecy (v. 1): The thing was true; every word of God is so; it was true that Daniel had such a vision, and that such and such things were said. This he solemnly attests upon the word of a prophet. Et hoc paratus est verificare–He was prepared to verify it; and, if it was a word spoken from heaven, no doubt it is stedfast and may be depended upon. But the time appointed was long, as long as to the end of the reign of Antiochus, which was 300 years, a long time indeed when it is looked upon as to come. Nay, and because it is usual with the prophets to glance at things spiritual and eternal, there is that in this prophecy which looks in type as far forward as to the end of the world and the resurrection of the dead; and then he might well say, The time appointed was long. It was, however, made as plain to him as if it had been a history rather than a prophecy; he understood the thing; so distinctly was it delivered to him, and received by him, that he could say he had understanding of the vision. It did not so much operate upon his fancy as upon his understanding.
II. An account of Daniel’s mortification of himself before he had this vision, not in expectation of it, nor, when he prayed that solemn prayer ch. ix., does it appear that he had any expectation of the vision in answer to it, but purely from a principle of devotion and pious sympathy with the afflicted people of God. He was mourning full three weeks (v. 2), for his own sins and the sins of his people, and their sorrows. Some think that the particular occasion of his mourning was slothfulness and indifference of many of the Jews, who, though they had liberty to return to their own land, continued still in the land of their captivity, not knowing how to value the privileges offered them; and perhaps it troubled him the more because those that did so justified themselves by the example of Daniel, though they had not that reason to stay behind which he had. Others think that it was because he heard of the obstruction given to the building of the temple by the enemies of the Jews, who hired counsellors against them, to frustrate their purpose (Ezr 4:4; Ezr 4:5), all the days of Cyrus, and gained their point from his son Cambyses, or Artaxerxes, who governed while Cyrus was absent in the Scythian war. Note, Good men cannot but mourn to see how slowly the work of God goes on in the world and what opposition it meets with, how weak its friends are and how active its enemies. During the days of Daniel’s mourning he ate no pleasant bread; he could not live without meat, but he ate little, and very sparingly, and mortified himself in the quality as well as the quantity of what he ate, which may truly be reckoned fasting, and a token of humiliation and sorrow. He did not eat the pleasant bread he used to eat, but that which was course and unpalatable, which he would not be tempted to eat any more of than was just necessary to support nature. As ornaments, so delicacies, are very disagreeable to a day of humiliation. Daniel ate no flesh, drank no wine, nor anointed himself, for those three week’s time, v. 3. Though he was now a very old man, and might plead that the decay of his nature required what was nourishing, though he was a very great man, and might plead that, being used to dainty meats, he could not do without them, it would prejudice his health if he were, yet, when it was both to testify and to assist his devotion, he could thus deny himself; let this be noted to the shame of many young people in the common ranks of life who cannot persuade themselves thus to deny themselves.
III. A description of that glorious person whom Daniel saw in vision, which, it is generally agreed, could be no other that Christ himself, the eternal Word. He was by the side of the river Hiddekel (v. 4), probably walking there, not for diversion, but devotion and contemplation, as Isaac walked in the field, to meditate; and, being a person of distinction, he had his servants attending him at some distance. There he looked up, and saw one man Christ Jesus. It must be he, for he appears in the same resemblance wherein he appeared to St. John in the isle of Patmos, Rev. i. 13-15. His dress was priestly, for he is the high priest of our profession, clothed in linen, as the high priest himself was on the day of atonement, that great day; his loins were girded (in St. John’s vision his paps were girded) with a golden girdle of the finest gold, that of Uphaz, for every thing about Christ is the best in its kind. The girding of the loins denotes his ready and diligent application to his work, as his Father’s servant, in the business of our redemption. His shape was amiable, his body like the beryl, a precious stone of a sky-colour. His countenance was awful, and enough to strike a terror on the beholders, for his face was as the appearance of lightning, which dazzles the eyes, both brightens and threatens. His eyes were bright and sparkling, as lamps of fire. His arms and feet shone like polished brass, v. 6. His voice was loud, and strong, and very piercing, like the voice of a multitude. The vox Dei—voice of God can overpower the vox populi—voice of the people. Thus glorious did Christ appear, and it should engage us, 1. To think highly and honourably of him. Now consider how great this man is, and in all things let him have the pre-eminence. 2. To admire his condescension for us and our salvation. Over all this splendour he drew a veil when he took upon him the form of a servant, and emptied himself.
IV. The wonderful influence that this appearance had upon Daniel and his attendants, and the terror that it struck upon him and them.
1. His attendants saw not the vision; it was not fit that they should be honoured with the sight of it. There is a divine revelation vouchsafed to all, from converse with which none are excluded who do not exclude themselves; but such a vision must be peculiar to Daniel, who was a favourite. Paul’s companions were aware of the light, but saw no man,Act 9:7; Act 22:9. Note, It is the honour of those who are beloved of God that, what is hidden from others, is known to them. Christ manifests himself to them, but not to the world, John xiv. 22. But, though they saw not the vision, they were seized with an unaccountable trembling; either from the voice they heard, or from some strange concussion or vibration of the air they felt, so it was that a great quaking fell upon them, so that they fled to hide themselves, probably among the willows that grew by the river’s side. Note, Many have a spirit of bondage to fear who never receive a spirit of adoption, to whom Christ has been, and will be, never otherwise than a terror. Now the fright that Daniel’s attendants were in is a confirmation of the truth of the vision; it could not be Daniel’s fancy, or the product of a heated imagination of his own, or it had a real, powerful, and strange effect upon those about him.
2. He himself saw it, and saw it alone, but he was not able to bear the sight of it. It not only dazzled his eyes, but overwhelmed his spirit, so that there remained no strength in him, v. 8. He said, as Moses himself, I exceedingly fear and quake. His spirits were all so employed, either in an intense speculation of the glory of this vision or in the fortifying of his heart against the terror of it, that his body was left in a manner lifeless and spiritless. He had no vigour in him, and was but one remove from a dead carcase; he looked as pale as death, his colour was gone, his comeliness in him was turned into corruption, and he retained no strength. Note, the greatest and best of men cannot bear the immediate discoveries of the divine glory; no man can see it and live; it is next to death to see a glimpse of it, as Daniel here; but glorified saints see Christ as he is and can bear the sight. But, though Daniel was thus dispirited with the vision of Christ, yet he heard the voice of his words and knew what he said. Note, We must take heed lest our reverence of God’s glory, by which we should be awakened to hear his voice both in his word and in his providence, should degenerate into such a dread of him as will disable or indispose us to hear it. It should seem that when the vision of Christ terrified Daniel the voice of his words soon pacified and composed him, silenced his fear, and laid him to sleep in a holy security and serenity of mind: When I heard the voice of his words I fell into a slumber, a sweet slumber, on my face, and my face towards the ground. When he saw the vision he threw himself prostrate, into a posture of the most humble adoration, and dropped asleep, not as careless of what he heard and saw, but charmed with it. Note, How dreadful soever Christ may appear to those who are under convictions of sin, and in terror by reason of it, there is enough in his word to quiet their spirits and make them easy, if they will but attend to it and apply it.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
DANIEL – CHAPTER 10
THE GLORY OF THE LORD AND ANGELIC CONFLICT OVER THE NATIONS
Verses 1-10:
Verse 1 declares that in the 3rd year of Cyrus, two years after the decree had gone forth to restore the Jews to their homeland, in response to Daniel’s prayer, ch. 9, this vision came to Daniel, whose Babylonian name was Belteshazzar, Dan 1:7. And the vision, “the thing” revealed, was true, and Daniel was caused by the angel Gabriel to understand it, though not at the first, as in Dan 8:26. Daniel, now grown very old, was perhaps no longer in the office of the court, as 1:21 states that he “continued (in office) unto the first year of Cyrus.” And this vision is in the third year. It is then added that though the thing revealed was true, the “appointed time,” was long or great, or as added v. 14, “for many days,” an extended, yet definite time in the future, to be ultimately and definitely fulfilled, Psa 119:160.
THE VISION OF THE GLORY OF GOD
As a summary review let it be recalled that the last half of Daniel, chapters 7-12, relate four visions and their interpretations, as given to Daniel:
1) First, the vision of four beasts (empires), ch. 7.
2) Second, the vision of two beasts (kingdoms), ch. 8.
3) Third, the vision of prophecy of 70 weeks (of years), ch. 9.
4) Fourth, as follows, the conflict of kings, ch. 10-12.
A VIEW OF ANGELS OF THE NATIONS
This fourth vision of Daniel, ch. 10-12, came two years after the return of the Jewish remnant to Palestine, 534 B.C., Daniel was given of the Lord a vision of angelic intervention in conflicts of the coming ages. These angelic creatures of Supernatural intelligence were some good and some evil. Some sought to protect and some to harm God’s people. Michael is the chief protecting angel of God over Israel, as presented in the Book of Daniel chs. 10, 13, 21; Dan 12:1, and of the church, as presented in the Book of Revelation, Rev 12:7-9. While Greece had her angel, Dan 10:20, and Persia had hers, v. 13, 20; Then in Eph 6:12 powers of the unseen world are the chief enemy motivators against which children of God and the church have to fight. Rev 12:7-9 describes how Satan and his angels shall make war against Michael and his angels. Satan shall then be cast out of heaven, and access to it, for the last time, having but a “little time,” a “times and half time,” 42 months, an half-week, or 31/2 years, the last half of the 70th week, or The Tribulation The Great, to obsess the Son of Perdition and finish his work on earth, before being bound and cast into the bottomless pit for a thousand years.
See Job 1:6; Job 1:12; Job 2:1; Job 2:7; Rev 12:7; Rev 12:9-10; Rev 12:12; Rev 12:14; Dan 9:27; Rev 20:1-2.
Verses 2, 3 relate that though aged, Daniel was in a state of mourning for three full weeks, 21 days. During that period he ate “no pleasant bread,” though hungry; Neither did he take any kind of flesh or wine into his mouth to strengthen or excite him; Nor did he anoint or bathe himself at all till three whole weeks of deep mourning were fulfilled regarding his people Israel and their future. This deep mourning was a sign of his sorrow, as he separated himself to prayer and intercession to God, Mat 9:14; Act 13:2; Deu 16:3.
Verses 4, 5 state that on the 24th day of the first month, April, of the third year, v. 1, of Cyrus king of Persia, Daniel was by the Great river Hiddekel, or the Tigris river. There he lifted up his eyes from 21 days of prayer, mourning, and fasting. And his eyes fell on a man clothed in linen, and girded with fine gold, the raiment of priests, a symbol of purity and sanctity, Exo 28:42; Jer 13:1; Rev 15:6 indicate it was also the raiment of prophets and angels. This was evidently the informing angel Gabriel, as in Dan 8:16; Dan 9:21; Dan 12:6-7; Jos 5:13; Heb 1:14.
Verse 6 describes him bodily, as like the Tarshish stone, chrysolite or topaz. The description of his face as lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, with arms and feet like polished brass, and his words were similar in melody to the merging voice of a multitude, Eze 1:16. This description seems to apply, or be applicable to, none other than the uncreated, self-existent angel of the covenant, the Divine Son of God, similar to that described by John the revelator, Rev 1:13-15.
Verse 7 states that Daniel alone saw or comprehended the vision. Because upon its appearance the men who were with him were so overwhelmed with quaking fear for their lives; They sought to hide themselves to escape some imagined imminent judgment, as they were terrified at the presence of the angelic being; See Rom 6:13-17.
Verse 8 witnesses that Daniel was left alone to see this vision, which left him with no strength in him, sapped of physical stamina. He was himself so affected physically and emotionally that his vigor of strength was gone in a moment, and he was turned into corruption or a death-like paleness, with sticky sweat. Such was the norm for one to whom an heavenly manifestation came in creature form, Dan 5:6; Dan 7:28.
Verse 9 adds that in spite of this emotional shock at the appearance of the brilliantly clothed heavenly personage, Daniel never lost use of his senses. He asserts that though he fell prostrate before him upon his face upon the ground; Yet he affirmed that he heard or comprehended the words of his voice, to relate them later, 1Pe 1:20-21.
Verse 10 adds that as Daniel lay face down upon the ground, listening to the voice of the heavenly personage that had appeared, an hand touched him. It lifted him to his knees and then upon the palm of his hands, upon his all-fours. This was likely the hands of Gabriel who interpreted other dreams for Daniel, though he represented the Son of God, Dan 8:16.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
We observe the Prophet by no means content with the usual method of address, for the purpose of stirring up the attention of the pious, and of assuring them how worthy of special notice are the prophecies which follow. He marks the time, the third year of King Cyrus, as the Jews were then forbidden by a new edict to build their temple, although liberty to do so had been previously granted to them. He says, “ a word ” was made known to him, and he adds, the word was true, although the time was long. The time is treated more at length in the next verse. By saying, a word was manifested to him, he is thought to distinguish this prophecy from others, as it was not offered to him by either a dream or a vision. He uses the word מראה, merah, a “ vision, ” at the end of this verse, but I do not see why the noun “word” should be taken in so restricted a sense. Interpreters, again, seek for a reason why he mentions his own name as Belteshazzar; some think it celebrates some honor to which he was raised; others treat it as commending the superiority of his abilities, as the name implies — descended from heaven; while others bring forward various conjectures. I have no hesitation in stating Daniel’s wish to erect some illustrious monument of his vocation among the Medes, Persians, and Chaldeans. There, most probably, he was usually called Belteshazzar, and the name Daniel was almost buried in oblivion, and so he wished to testify to his being no stranger to the people of God, although he suffered a foreign name to be imposed upon him; for we have already seen the impossibility of his avoiding it. I therefore think the Prophet had no other intention than to render this prophecy notorious throughout all those regions in which he was well known under the name of Belteshazzar. Besides this, he wished to testify to his fellow-countrymen that he was not entirely cut off from the Church through being called Belteshazzar by the Chaldees; for he was always the same, and while banished from his country, was endued with the Spirit of prophecy, as we have previously seen. As the name of Daniel was almost unknown in Chaldea, he wished to make known the existence of both his names.
It now follows, And there is truth in the word Daniel here commends the certainty of the prophecy, as if he had said, I bring nothing before you but what is firm and stable, and whose actual performance the faithful ought confidently to expect. There is truth in the word, says he; meaning, there was no room for doubting his assertions, for he had been divinely instructed in events which should be fulfilled in their own time. I understand what follows to mean, although the time should be long. Some of the Rabbis take צבא , tzeba, for the angelic hosts, which is quite absurd in this place. The word signifies “army” as well as an appointed time, but the exposition which they thrust upon the passage cannot stand its ground. The particle “and,” as I think, must here be taken adversatively, in the sense of “although.” Thus the Prophet proclaims our need of calmness of mind, and patient endurance, until God shall really complete and perform what he has verbally announced. This feeling ought to be extended to all prophecies. We know how ardent are the dispositions of men, and how hastily they are carried away by their own desires. We are compelled, therefore, to curb our impetuosity, if we wish to make progress in the school of God, and we must admit this general principle: If a promise should tarry, wait for it; for it will surely come, and will not delay. (Hab 2:3) Here Daniel affirms in a special sense, the time will be long this would restrain the faithful from rushing headlong with too much haste; they would command their feelings, and remain tranquil till the full maturity of the period should arrive.
He afterwards adds, He understood the vision; by this assertion he confirms the prophecy which he is about to explain, and thus assures us of his not uttering anything either perplexed or obscure. He also induces all the pious to hope for the exercise of the same understanding as he had himself attained; as if he had said, I know what God wished; he has explained to me by his angel various events which I will now set forth in their own order; let every one peruse these prophecies attentively and reverently, and may God grant him the same gift of understanding, and lead him to certain knowledge. The information conveyed by the Prophet belongs to all the pious, to deter them from sluggishness and despair. At the first glance this teaching may appear very obscure, but they must seek from the Lord that light of manifestation which he deigned to bestow upon the Prophet himself. It now follows, —
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
THE VISION THAT OVERWHELMED
Dan 10:1-21.
IN continuing our studies today on the Book of Daniel, we face a further record of the Prophets personal experiences in dealing with the Lord. These experiences are of no tame or customary character. They are, as might be expected, wholly out of the ordinary.
Prophets of the Daniel type are not the product of the usual, the customary in thought and feeling. They are instead those rare souls who behold visions while others gaze into blank space; who hear voices while others hear but a sound or experience oppressing silence.
We have come to believe, and with good occasion, that great souls are rare because shallowness is so common to the spirits of men; and that Daniels only appear at the intervals of centuries because God so seldom discovers one spiritually fit to receive Divine revelations.
Turning to the text we ask attention to the Setting of the Vision, the Glory of the Person, and the Delayed but Prophetic Answer to Prayer.
THE SETTING OF THE VISION
The time of the same is carefully stated.
In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel * * in the four and twentieth day of the first month.
Personally, we are quite inclined to believe that a revelation of the Lords love made to a little child is just as good a ground of his salvation, een though time well nigh obliterates the memory of the experience, as are those cataclysmic experiences to which mission converts so often refer. And yet it cannot be doubted that there is a certain potency in being able to point to the very day when God manifested Himself to one in mercy. That fact is felt in practically every meeting when such a testimony is made; and if it be true of the hour of conversion, it is not less, but even more true, concerning a special revelation.
Unquestionably the guiding Spirit who moved Daniel to relate this experience counted it of value that the very year of the kings reign in which it occurred, and the very month, yea even the day of the month, should be recorded.
He, the Holy Ghost, with whom all wisdom is, well understood the value of definiteness, and, as we shall see later in this study, this experience was logically related to other and contributing causes, the meaning of which is made all the more clear in view of the very time at which these events took place.
There are men whose comparative greatness is illustrated by the circumstance that they take neither time nor pains to record their successive duties, experiences, or even impressive observations; but God, the Holy Ghost, is Infinite, and every revelation of Himself to man with a view to definite and desirable ends, becomes an eternal record. His data is never deficient, and His diary never incomplete, wherein is a certain ground of justice in the final judgment when the books are opened. There will be no omissions. God knows the day, the year, the hour, yea even the minute of every human experience!
The exact place of this revelation is clearly named.
I was by the side of the great river, which is Hiddekel; (or Tigris.) (Dan 10:4).
It is just such details of an experience that give it permanence. The world is filled with places that are forever linked with unusual experiences. You cannot pass the place and be unmindful of the event. One always thrills to the places of his birth, his new birth and baptism, to the place of his marriage, to the place of his former residence.
In court trials the place often performs witness-miracles. To take the murderer back to the place where he committed the deed is often to unman him. The sight of the same so far unnerves as to force confession, and that which is true of deeds wrought under satanic impulses is equally true of those wrought under the Holy Spirits guidance.
There cannot be a true vision of God or an overwhelming sense of His presence and power without forever fixing the place of that experience indelibly in the memory.
Even if Daniel were writing with an uninspired pen, he could scarcely do less than set down where it happened: but when it is remembered that in making this record he was being borne along by the Holy Ghost, such a major point as the place would be emphasized. The record would come to the children of the centuries with no uncertain sound, but rather with a voice,definite, dated, located, fixed and final.
Mark also
The soul-exercise that led to the experience. W. C. Stephens in his volume on the Book of Daniel tells us truthfully that the date of this vision was two years after the captors were released to return at their pleasure, to Jerusalem to rebuild the Temple.
Doubtless that was the date to which Daniel had prayed since the captivity occurred; and now, at last, when God had answered his prayer, by making Darius the medium of His will and also the agent of His promise, there was an indifferent response on Israels part. Only a few of the multitudes of the twelve tribes carried into captivity seemed to care to return to the Land of Promise.
How easy it is for a man of God, associated for a few years with the people of the world, to adjust himself to the new atmosphere and settle contentedly into the same.
I know church men who, fifteen, twenty, twenty-five years ago, were active in the service, apparently devout in spirit and fairly consecrated in plans, who through natural prosperity, sometimes, through a wifes influence; at others, and still more often, by reason of commercial and social fellowships, they have been carried away into the worlds captivity, and they have even lost their taste for Christian fellowship, and their interest in the temple of God, and are the burden of every true prophets prayer.
It is therefore easy to understand why Daniel was in such agony. There is nothing that tears the heart of the true prophetthe shepherd of Gods sheep,like the sight of Gods people immersed in the world, and so content therewith that the Homeland and the sacred house no longer makes effective appeal.
I count this church one of the greatest, one of the best in all the land, and yet, the 500, the 1,000, the 1,500, the well-nigh 2,000 members of the same who seldom turn their feet homeward, who seldom seek the inside of the sanctuary, who reveal but slight interest in either the building or the up-keep of the temple of God,these are the pastors agony.
Dr. F. B. Meyer is reputed as the man who said, Some people are always telegraphing to Heaven for God to send a cargo of blessings to them; but they are not at the wharf-side to unload the vessel when it comes.
The one point at which the Church of God has lost out is this of importunate prayer.
Doubtless in answer to Daniels prayer, Darius has made his promises, but the objective was not reached in that circumstance owing to Israels indifference and deadness, and so the man of God prays on.
We sometimes set aside a day for fasting and prayer when there is a great issue of importance before us. Think what it would mean if, by the pressure of interest, more of us could reach the point where, like Daniel, without any appointment, we could find ourselves mourning for three full weeks tasting neither bread nor meat nor wine, and stopping not to refresh our languishing bodies, but crying on and out till God should hear!
We say we want a revival. The truth is we are not deeply concerned. If we were so much concerned that we would forget meat, bread and drink, in the agony of petition, the brass heavens would break; and blessings, beyond our capacity to receive, would fall!
But I must pass to the Revelation. It consists in
THE GLORY OF THE PERSON
Then I lifted up mine eyes, and looked, and behold a certain man (Dan 10:5).
The vision vouchsafed is that of a man. But the phrase a certain man is, in our judgment, employed with purpose.
We have no doubt whatever that this man was none other than the Lord Himself; that this revelation is a theophany.
Christ was a man! That fact the Bible constantly emphasizes, and with good occasion. The moment that fact is forgotten His Saviour-hood is obscured.
We are in absolute sympathy with Henry Van Dykes criticism of Canon Liddons presentation of Christs manhood. In his volume The Divinity of our Lord Liddon said,
Christs Manhood is not of itself an individual being; It is not a seat and centre of personality; It has no conceivable existence apart from the act whereby the Eternal Word, in becoming Incarnate, called It into being and made It His own. It is a vesture which He has folded around His person; It is an instrument through which He places Himself in contact with men and whereby He acts upon humanity.
Truly, as Van Dyke remarks,
If we accept this picture of Christ, the manhood of Jesus fades, retreats, grows dim and shadowy. It wavers like a veil. It dissolves like mist. It descends again mysterious and impenetrable, illusory and impersonal, to envelop Him whom we love and adore, in its strange and unfamiliar folds. We grope after Him, but we can touch nothing but the hem of His mystic robe. We long for Him, but He approaches us, and comes into contact with us, only through an instrument. The Son of Man, whom human eyes beheld and human hands touched, is not the real, living, veritable Saviour, but only the form, the garment, of an inscrutable life. And if, in our dire confusion, our reasoning faith still succeeds in holding fast to the Eternal Logos, our confiding faith is maimed and robbed by the loss of that true, near, personal, loving, sympathizing Jesus, who was born of a woman, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, buried and risen again.
There has been raging of late a controversy between the men who say that Christs temptations were real and that He could have sinned, and those who say that Christs Deity was such that temptation found nothing in Him to which it could appeal.
In our judgment it is not only foolish, but a wicked war of words; that each position is just so remote from the truth as to account for the controversy itself.
To say that Christ could have sinned is to forget that God was in His flesh, and God cannot be tempted with evil, but is always Conqueror over it. To say that there was nothing in Christ that responded to temptation is to deny the flesh inherited from His mother, and the human blood that flowed in His veins, and so, to remove from us the very Lord whose express purpose in taking upon Him the form of man was that He might be tempted in all points like as we are, and by the very temptations learn how to succor us in our times of trial.
It is a serious thing to give up the Deity of Christ, as Modernism and Unitarianism have done; but it is scarce less serious to give up His humanity, as some professedly orthodox men seem determined to do.
The Christ of the Old Testament was both God and man, as well as God in man.
He saw, then, a certain man.
Distinguishing marks indicate the God-Man.
His loins were girded with fine gold of Uphaz:
His body also was like the beryl, and His face as the appearance of lightning, and His eyes as lamps of fire, and His arms and His feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of His words like the voice of a multitude (Dan 10:5-6).
No one ever called into question that Johns vision in Revelation 1: was a look into the open Heavens, and a fleeting glance of the glorified Saviour, and when John saw Him who declared Himself to be the Alpha and Omega He was girt about the paps with a golden girdle. His head and His hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and His eyes were as a flame of fire; and His feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and His voice as the sound of many waters (Rev 1:13-15).
It is inconceivable that these are not the one and the same Person. Christ did not wait His experience through Marys womb to first manifest Himself, but only to take on human flesh, thereby becoming a Saviour of human understanding, a Person of human affection, and a sympathetic Saviour from sin.
But I insist upon retaining this Divinely-given and supernaturally revealed proof of His humanity; I am not even intimating that He is merely Super-Man or even Super-Human; I agree absolutely with Ian. Maclaren that when one.
Seriously recommends Jesus to the notice of the world by certificates from Rousseau and Napoleon, or when some light-hearted man of letters embroiders a needy paragraph with a string of names where Jesus is wedged in between Zoroaster and Goethe, the Christian consciousness is aghast. This treatment is not merely bad taste; it is impossible by any canon of thought; it is as if one should compare the sun with electric light, or the color of Titian with the bloom of the rose. We criticise every other teacher; we have an intuition of Jesus. He is not a subject of study, He is a revelation to the soulthat or nothing.
In other words, He is God!
The sight of Him was altogether overwhelming.
And I Daniel alone saw the vision: for the men that were with me saw not the vision; but a great quaking fell upon them, so that they fled to hide themselves.
Therefore I was left alone, and saw this great vision, and there remained no strength in me: for my comeliness was turned in me into corruption, and I retained no strength (Dan 10:7-8).
These two results have never failed when sinful men beheld His face.
When Isaiah in the year that king Uzziah died saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, he cried, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of Hosts (Isa 6:1; Isa 6:5).
When Peter saw the miracle of the fishers net and recognized in Christ the Lord of Heaven, he fell upon his face and cried, Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord (Luk 5:8).
When John from the isle of Patmos saw Him, he fell at His feet as dead.
We are told that no man can see God and live, but God, even when veiled in human form, is glory in such expression as to overwhelm men with a sense of sin.
It is quite impossible for one who knows what the Bible has to say upon these subjects to retain patience even with that spiritual conceit of this century which talks about holiness and about eradication and about perfection.
In all the Old Testament not one holier man than Daniel could be found.
Joseph and Daniel,how they stand out with cleanness of character, correctness of conduct! And yet, doubtless, Joseph, had he enjoyed such a vision, would have prostrated himself to the dust as Daniel did, and cried out as every human who has ever beheld the King in His glory, with a consciousness of sin, feeling as Daniel said, that his very comeliness was turned in me into corruption.
Or, as the Apostle Paul put it, his righteousness into the rags of unrighteousness.
The boasters of this day need to hear John that beautiful, consistent, clean-soul charactersay again, and yet again, until spiritual conceit is killed by the sentence
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the Truth is not in us.
If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His Word is not in us (1Jn 1:8; 1Jn 1:10).
The sense of sin is at one and the same time the first and the last step in salvation. No man can be saved without taking it since Christ came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance, and no man can be sanctified without the consciousness of it, for the indwelling Spirit, who is our Sanctification, came expressly for the purpose of convicting the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment to come.
Salvation is not by character but by substitution instead, through Him who bare our sins in His own body on the tree. We are doomed to a man!
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God (Rom 3:23).
Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the Law (Rom 3:27-28).
THE DELAYED BUT PROPHETIC ANSWER
Behold, an hand touched me, which set me upon my knees and upon the palms of my hands.
And he said unto me, O Daniel, a man greatly beloved, understand the words that I speak unto thee, and stand upright: for unto thee am I now sent. And when he had spoken this word unto me, I stood trembling.
Then said he unto me, Fear not, Daniel: for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were Heard, and I am come for thy words.
But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.
Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision is for many days (Dan 10:10-14).
Gods purposes are often hindered. There are those who would have us believe that two persons are here involved; first, the Son of Man in the vision; and second, some angel, or limited one, gives to Daniel the revelation. The ground of their argument is that it would be impossible to withstand the Lord, and so they say the speaker here must have been another person from the one seen in Daniels vision.
To us the argument is faulty! The Lord can be hindered. The Lord is constantly hindered. That is not because He lacks might or powerall power belongeth unto Him; but it is because He Himself recognizes the wills of men and refuses to ride over them rough shod.
Concerning Christs visit to Nazareth it is affirmed He could there do no mighty works * * because of their unbelief. In Gadara the pig-keepers prayed Him to depart out of their coasts, and He responded to their petition.
In all of His parables He hinted the constant human interference. Take the parable of the Kingdom as an illustration. The seed was sown, but the fowls devoured it: some fell upon stony places and withered, some fell among thorns and the thorns choked it, and His own explanation of this parable is that the peoples heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them; hindering.
Take the parable of the Kingdom of Heaven and the sower of the seeds, and the enemys work of the tares. What are they but hindrances? And the birds lodging in the branches of the mustard tree, what are they but hindrances? And the leaven which the woman hid in the three measures of meal, what is that but hindrance?
In all probability the prince of Persia, Darius himself, animated possibly by some controlling evil spirit under the command of Satanthe God of this worldstood in the way of his answer to Daniels prayer, exactly as the present world rulers stand square across the path of every true prophets prayer for righteousness at the present time.
There is no objection to the fact that Michael came to help Him, since all ministering spirits are the servants of His will and do His pleasure; and who shall attempt to compute their accomplishments?
Still further evidence of the fact that this is the Lord is revealed in the circumstance that again the prophet sets his face to the ground; again his tongue is stilled in his mouth, and he cannot speak until this One whom he calls My Lord recovers his strength and returns breath to his body, touching and strengthening him, even as John in the apocalyptic vision was lifted up by the right hand of the Holy One, and encouraged by His word, Fear not; I am the First and the Last: I am He that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore.
The language is akin, Fear not: peace be unto thee, be strong, yea, be strong. And when he had thus spoken Daniel was strengthened, and said, Let my lord speak; for thou hast strengthened me.
The circumstance that Michael came to his assistance here instead of disproving his Lordship rather evidences the same. When Jesus faced the Adversary in the temptation, to the point where the devil left Him, angels came and ministered unto Him.
Gods agents are often angels and arch-angels.
Dr. Gumbart, many years ago, in an article published in one of our religious papers referred to his visit to the Dore Gallery in London, where he had looked upon Tissots water color, representing the ministry of angels in this very time of HIS TEMPTATION.
At first the picture seemed grotesque and it was difficult to discover the artists thought. But after a while the whole conception broke vividly upon Gumbarts mind. The body of Christ, exhausted after the fearful strain, lay prone upon the ground. Scores of angel hands, so painted that the angels seemed to be invisible to the beholder, touched every portion of His body. No angel face or form was visible; nothing but the hands only; and Gumbart said:
As I thought upon it, tears streamed down my cheeks. Yes, I thought, we cannot see them but they are there. We feel their touch and in the time of trial when the soul is sick, angel hands are touching us and through their invisible finger tips, filled with the Divine magnetism, we are refreshed and strengthened, and charged with even the powers of Heaven itself.
Who can doubt, in the performance of His will, these spirit-agencies are at His command; and who would attempt to compute what fullness they have contributed to life?
But to conclude:
Gods plan will find eventual completion. The remaining verses read:
Now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come (Dan 10:20).
This is a plain reference to the fact that when the battle of Marathon shall occur, God will be against Persia and with Greece, and here again Prophecy is the mould of history. The truth of Scripture found justification; and the Lord, with Michael, the arch angel, was adequate in that day to turn the tide of all world-affairs.
It is that thought with which I conclude today, for the centuries have not spent His strength; the wars of the ages have not shortened His arm. He is God still!
Republicans may hold their convention and, in search of votes, straddle the liquor question. Democrats may hold their convention and in defiance of Scripture declare for strong drink. But He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. While men may temporarily thwart His will and for a time hinder, He can call His arch angel Michael, and as Jonathan and his armor-bearer went through the hosts of the Philistines to see them flee, fall and perish, so God, calling only the archangel for his companion, shall ride forth conquering and to conquer.
The Son of God goes forth to war,
A kingly crown to gain:
His blood-red banner streams afar,
Who follows in His train?
Who best can drink His cup of woe,
Triumphant over pain;
Who patient bears his cross below,
He follows in His train.
The martyr first, whose eagle eye
Could pierce beyond the grave,
Who saw his Master in the sky,
And called on Him to save:
Like him, with pardon on his tongue,
In midst of mortal pain,
He prayed for them that did the wrong
Who follows in His train?
A noble army, men and boys,
The matron and the maid,
Around the Saviours throne rejoice,
In robes of light arrayed.
They climbed the steep ascent of Heaven
Through peril, toil and pain:
O God, to us may grace be given
To follow in their train!
Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley
HOMILETICS
SECT. XXXVII.ANGEL MINISTRIES (Chap. Dan. 10:1-21)
In this and the two following chapters we have another of Daniels remarkable visions. It is both the last and the longest recorded, occupying, as it does, nearly three whole chapters of the book. It was vouchsafed to Daniel as a man greatly beloved, which he is here again declared twice over to be. It was given him in the third year of Cyrus king of Persia, B.C. 531, Daniel now approaching the ninetieth year of his age. The prophet relates in the present chapter his spiritual exercises previous to his receiving the vision, which were no doubt made preparatory to his doing so. Already with thankfulness and joy he had seen his people, according to Jehovahs gracious promise, restored, through the edict of Cyrus, the result of his own influence and exertions, to their own land. Notwithstanding this, how-ever, the Jews who had returned to Jerusalem, and who after all formed but a small proportion of the exiles, were in great humiliation and depression. Their first attempt had been to rebuild the temple; but in this they were opposed and hindered by the heathen already in the land. These, who had been settled there by Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, now demanded a share in the erection of the temple. This the Jews refused, on the ground that they formed no part of the covenant-people. Irritated by the refusal, these heathen settlers, or Samaritans, as they were then and afterwards called (Samaria being the part of the country in which they were located), set themselves to oppose the work in every possible way, and especially by seeking to prejudice the king of Persia against it, which they continued to do throughout the reign of Cyrus (Ezr. 4:1-4). This opposition to the work, and its consequent interruption, had doubtless reached the ears of Daniel at the Persian court, where, probably on account of his advanced age, he had still remained. The tidings pressed heavily on his spirit; and deeply sympathising with his brethren, and concerned for the cause of his God, at the beginning of the new year, and as the time of the Passover approached, he set himself, as he had done before (chap. Dan. 9:3), to seek the Lords mercy for his people by prayer and fasting. He relates that in those days, he, the same Daniel who is also called Belteshazzar, [287] was mourning three full weeks; [288] neither eating any pleasant bread, nor drinking wine, nor anointing his body, [289] during the whole of that period (Dan. 10:2-3). The place of retirement which he had chosen for this exercise of continued prayer and fasting was on the banks of the Hiddekel or Tigris, where there already existed an oratory or place of prayer, according to Jewish custom. There, whither he had gone accompanied by some of his friends, he received the vision which he here relates. The communications, as on a former occasion, are made through an angel, who declares that what he communicates is what is noted in the Scripture of truth; [290] probably Gods unchanging decree, which was now so far made known to him. It is stated by the angel that the communication is true, [291] though the time appointed for its fulfilment (or the warfare and trouble predicted) was long. Daniel intimates also that he understood the thing: I had understanding of the vision; [292] a thing which, in relation to one point at least, as he afterwards relates, he particularly desired and asked for (chap. Dan. 12:8). The present chapter is remarkable for the insight which it affords into the angel-world and angel-ministries, given as a kind of preface to the divine communications which were to follow. The occasion of this special information being now vouchsafed to the prophet, was the struggle going on between the Jews and their heathen neighbours in the country to obtain the influence of the kings of Persia for, or against, the building of the temple; as also the situation which the Jews were, for centuries to come, to occupy in relation to the great world-powers to which they were to be subject, and from which they were so greatly to suffer. It was to be for the comfort of Daniel and his people to know that the Providence of a covenant-God was watching over them; and that under that Providence angelic agencies were continually employed in their behalf. These celestial beings appear to Daniel in the vision; the first and chief of whom, from a comparison of the description given of him (Dan. 10:5-6) with that in Rev. 1:13, &c., would seem to be identified with the Angel of the covenant, the Lord of angels Himself. [293] It appears uncertain whether he, or one of the other two, is the principal speaker in the vision, though probably one of the latter, [294] speaking under his direction, as in chap. Dan. 8:16. From the view here given regarding the ministry and agency of angels for the benefit of the Church of God in the world, we may observe the following particulars:
[287] Belteshazzar (Dan. 10:1). Calvin thinks that Daniel mentions this name as that by which he was better known among the nations with whom he would have this prophecy to become famous. Polanus thinks it is given to show that he was the same person who had the former visions, that so it might be received with greater credit and authority.
[288] Three full weeks (Dan. 10:2). Literally, three weeks of days; an expression, which while it denotes, according to Hebrew idiom, three full weeks, may also indicate that there are weeks of another kind than those of days; e. g., the seventy weeks of the preceding chapter, which are weeks of years. Dr. Cox mentions as reasons for Daniels present protracted season of humiliation and prayerhis personal transgressions, the opposition experienced in the rebuilding of the city and temple, the reluctance of many of the Jews to return to Jerusalem and cooperate in the work, and the predicted conduct of his people when Messiah should appear and be cut off.
[289] Anoint myself (Dan. 10:3). Jerome says the Persians, instead of bathing, anointed their bodies all over, which, according to Priny, was done both to defend themselves from the excessive heat, and preserve their bodies in health. Keil observes that the anointing with oil was a sign of joy and a joyous frame of mind, as with guests at a banquet (Amo. 6:6); and was now intermitted by Daniel as in a time of sorrow.
[290] In the scripture of truth (Dan. 10:21). Calvin observes that Holy Scripture often adopts forms of speech according to human custom; the scripture of truth being nothing but the eternal and inviolable decree of God Himself. Bishop Lowth remarks: Gods decrees are spoken of as if they were committed to writing and registered in a book. Mr. Bosanquet thinks it to have been a book or writing concerning the truth; and that what follows is mostly a comment founded upon it, and not to be mistaken for prophecy.
[291] The thing was true (Dan. 10:1). Keil observes that in this statement Hitzig finds an intimation that betrays the writers standpoint, namely, the time when the thing was realised, Daniel not being able to say this before it happened. But this objection supposes that the author was a lying prophet who spoke from his own heart (Jer. 29:8; Jer. 29:15). But if Daniel had actually received a word from God, he could before its fulfilment testify its truth; that testimony here indicating, as in chap. Dan. 8:26, that the word now communicated to the prophet contained things which it would be difficult for the human heart to believe. Mr. Bos-anquet thinks that it was part of the interpretation made by some unknown person in or after the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, and in the course of time accidentally transferred from the alternate columns or margin of the sacred roll into the text. But Rev. 22:19, teaches caution in supposing passages to be interpolations.
[292] He understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision (Dan. 10:1). Rosenmller understands (bin) imperatively, and (binah) as a mere repetition of the word: Consider it, consider, I say, the thing made known through the vision. So Lengerke and Mr. Bosanquet. Keil thinks that a summons to give heed or to understand would not be here in place. He considers (binah) a substantive, and (bin) the preterite, and not, as Hvernick, the infinitive: Understanding was to him by that which was seen, (bammareh), by the vision, i.e., by the appearance described in Dan. 10:5, &c. Kliefoth refers this last word to the earlier prophecies of chap. Dan. 8:7; Dan. 8:9. The objection that Daniel says (chap. Dan. 12:8) that he did not understand the vision, is disposed of, he observes, on the ground that the non-understanding had reference to a single point, viz., the duration of the affliction; regarding which, however, disclosures are given to the prophet in chap. Dan. 12:10, &c. Auberlen refers to a distinction, also noticed by Keil, between this and other revelations vouchsafed to the prophet, viz., that it is communicated partly by supernatural illumination for the interpretation of the dream-vision, partly by visions, and partly by the appearance of angels; indicating a noteworthy progression, in which one revelation always prepares the way, in a material and formal respect, for that which follows, and by which God gradually prepared the prophet for the reception of still more definite disclosures.
[293] A certain man clothed in linen (Dan. 10:5). Dr. Rule thinks that it is Gabriel, distinguished as the Lords chosen messenger, who is described in Dan. 10:5-6; and that by a comparison with Rev. 1:13, &c., we find that the descriptions, though resembling each other, are not to be confounded, the latter having every divine attribute, while the former has none. Brightman thinks that his priestly garments proclaim him to be the only priest worthy to be consulted in all doubtful matters, and whose lips keep knowledge. Keil is led by Rev. 1:13, &c., to regard him as no common angel-prince, but a manifestation of Jehovah, i.e., the Logos or Word, who afterwards was made flesh; his appearance resembling that of the glory of Jehovah as seen by Ezekiel at the river Chebar, and indicating how by his acts he would reveal himself to his people in the great tribulation. So colampadius, Willet, and others.
[294] A hand touched me (Dan. 10:10). Hengstenberg thinks, with many old interpreters, that the person who speaks to Daniel and announces the future, is not the same who is described in Dan. 10:5-6, as the man clothed in linen. Jerome thinks they are the same created angel. So Pfaff and Bullinger. colampadius thinks they are the same person, viz., Christ. So Keil. Hengstenberg identifies him with Gabriel. Dr. Rule thinks that other angels, less terrible than the one described in Dan. 10:5-6, ministered to the prophet (Dan. 10:10; Dan. 10:16; Dan. 10:18). Birks thinks the speaker in the vision is the angel of the covenant, the Son of God.
1. The existence of different ranks and orders among those angelic ministers. The angels introduced in this chapter are princes; while one of them, named Michael, is called one of the chief or first princes (Dan. 10:13); [295] this same Michael being also called (chap. Dan. 12:1) the great prince, and elsewhere the archangel or chief of the angels (Jud. 1:9; Rev. 12:7). [296] As distinguished from the angels in general, some would appear to be princes, and that of different ranks. Peter seems to indicate the existence of such a celestial hierarchy, when he speaks of angels, authorities, and powers being subject to Christ; as well as Paul, who speaks of principalities and powers in heavenly places (1Pe. 3:22; Eph. 3:19). Each of those princes apparently the constituted leader of an angelic host, perhaps one of those legions of which Jesus speaks (Mat. 26:53). The Book of Revelation speaks of Michael and his angels conflicting with the devil and his angels (Rev. 12:7). A similar subordination of rank would seem still to continue to exist aiming the angels who fell, and who are still spoken of as principalities and powers (Eph. 6:12).
[295] Michael (Dan. 10:13). = who is like God, expresses the idea of Gods unparalleled helping power. Hengstenberg identifies Michael with the Angel of the Lord, the leader of the Israelites, and prince of the army of Jehovah, mentioned in Exo. 32:34; Jos. 5:13; Zec. 1:5). Melanchthon, Broughton, Junius, and others identify him with Christ. Birks and most interpreters think him a created angel. Calvin leaves it indifferent, observing that God does not confine Himself to any fixed rule.
[296] One of the chief princes (Dan. 10:13). Keil observes that the title here given to Michael points undoubtedly to an arrangement of orders and degrees among the angels. From the circumstance that the guardian spirit of Persia (see next note) is called (sar), a prince, it does not follow that princes is not a designation of the angels generally, but only, as Hofmann thinks, of the princes of the peoples who are the spirits-ruling in the social affairs of nations and kingdoms. The chief princes, he adds, can only be the princes, or chiefs, of the good angels who remain in communion with God and work for His kingdom. The work of standing up for Israel (chap. Dan. 12:1) is committed to Michael as one of them. As God would not intrust to a subordinate spirit a work demanding special power and greatness, the title given to Michael was for Israels comfort, as affirming that they were under very powerful protection, though little esteemed before the world.
2. Their appointment to different spheres or posts of duty. Thus Michael is here represented as the prince of the people of Israel (Dan. 10:21), and in chap. Dan. 12:1, the prince that standeth for the children of Daniels people; his post apparently being to defend and protect that favoured nation. On the other side, we read of the princes of Persia and Grecia, being, in the opinion of many, the subordinate leaders among the fallen angels, to whom are assigned by their chief these countries as their respective spheres of operation. [297] So Paul speaks of principalities and powers, the rulers of the darkness of this world (Eph. 6:12). How far individuals may be made the special charge of certain angels is perhaps less certain. Jesus, however, speaks of little children as having their angels (Mat. 18:10). The believers in Marys house at Jerusalem said of Peter at the door, It is his angel (Act. 12:16). The hill on which Elishas house stood was seen to be full of horses and chariots of fire round about the prophet (2Ki. 6:17).
[297] The prince of Persiaof the kingdom of Persiaof Grecia (Dan. 10:13; Dan. 10:20). Jerome, Melanchthon, Osiander, and others think the king of Persia to be Satan or evil angels. Dr. Rule thinks that the prince of the kingdom of Persia was Darius, and that the kings of Persia (Dan. 10:13) were the kings of subject provinces; while the princes of Persia and of Grecia (Dan. 10:20) were the kings of those countries, the King of Grecia being Alexander the Great. So Calvin, who thinks of Cambyses the son of Cyrus. Dr. Cox thinks that Satan, the prince or god of this world, either by himself or by one of his chief agents, employed his machinations to instigate Cambyses and the court of Persia to hostilities against the Jews; while the angelic spirit, to whom this ministration was intrusted, employed his efforts to influence the king and his nobles in their favour. Keil thinks the prince of the kingdom of Persia, in Dan. 10:20 the prince of Persia, is not King Cyrus, nor, as Hvernick and Kranichfeld, with Calvin and most of the reformers, think, the kings of Persia collectively; but the guardian spirit or the protecting genius of the Persian kingdom, as the Rabbis and many Christian interpreters after Jerome have acknowledged; a spirit-being, yet not the heathen national god of the Persians, but, according to the view of Scripture (1Co. 10:20, &c.), the demon () of the Persian kingdom; i.e., the supernatural spirit-power standing behind the national gods, which we may call the guardian spirit of this kingdom. According to Kliefoth, this spirit stood behind the Persian kings to influence them against Israel, and to direct against the chosen people the power lying in Persian heathendom, so as to support the insinuations of the Samaritans, and whom the angel, mentioned in Dan. 10:5, came, at Daniels prayer, to dislodge from his position and deprive of his influence; in which, with the aid of Michael, he so far succeeded that, after a contest of twenty-one days, he gained the mastery over him, and stood in his place beside the kings of Persia, so as henceforth to influence them in favour of Israel. By the king of Grecia, Keil understands the spirit of the Maccabean world-kingdom, who, while the angel addressing Daniel returns to Persia to maintain the position he has gained, will come and cause a new conflict. Dr. Pusey, after Gregory, Theodoret, Lyranus, and others, regards these princes as good angels desiring the welfare of the peoples committed to their care, and so contending, though in submission to the will of God.
3. The deep interest felt by those angelic beings in the welfare of good men and the prosperity of Gods cause. Their interest in good men seen in the manner in which Daniel is addressed as a man greatly beloved; words indicative of tender compassion and encouragement, as addressed to an aged saint in whom the infirmities of age, blended with a deep self-abasement, rendered such assurances of regard especially grateful and appropriate. The exhortation, fear not, expressive of the same loving interest and tender consideration. The earnest endeavour to impart strength to the overpowered and fainting prophet (Dan. 10:18-19) reminds us of the same affectionate concern manifested on behalf of the Man of Sorrows Himself in His agony in the garden (Luk. 22:43). The whole of the narrative before us in reference to the exertions of these angelic ministers on behalf of Israel indicative of their deep interest in the welfare of that people, and the prosperity of Jehovahs cause in the world.
4. The variety of their ministrations. Here, as elsewhere, we see them employed in conveying messages and delivering communications from God to His servants (Dan. 10:14). So in chap. Dan. 9:21-22, we see them also engaged in counteracting the evil influences brought to bear on rulers and others by the adversaries of Gods cause and people. From chap. Dan. 11:1, we find that the same celestial personage who communicates with Daniel had exerted his influence in strengthening and encouraging Darius in favour of the Jews, when thwarted and opposed in their work of restoring Jerusalem by the Samaritans, who sought to prejudice the king against them and their work. Their ministrations as varied as the circumstances, necessities, and requirements of the servants of God and heirs of salvation for whose benefit they are employed in ministering.
5. Their union and mutual help among themselves. Michael, one of the chief princes, says the principal speaker in the chapter, came to help me (Dan. 10:13). And again (Dan. 10:21), There is none that holdeth (marg., strengthened himself,puts forth strenuous efforts or vigorously co-operates) with me in these things but Michael your prince. The angels, though excelling in strength, yet of limited power. Even among those potent agents, co-operation and mutual aid are necessary and enjoyed. The same important principle experienced among the celestial as among terrestrial workers, Union is strength. Two are better than one. An example for the Church on earth in their works of good-doing.
6. Difficulties and opposition experienced by these angelic agents in their benevolent work. The angel who came to Daniel with the divine communications was withstood by the prince of the kingdom of Persia, and that apparently all the twenty-one days during which Daniel was fasting and praying (Dan. 10:13), [298] After fulfilling his mission to the prophet, he had to return to fight again with the prince of Persia, who was still endeavouring to thwart his services on behalf of the Jews (Dan. 10:20). So in Rev. 12:7, Michael and his angels are opposed by the devil and his angels. In Jude, Dan. 10:9, the same archangel is represented as having contended with the devil about the body of Moses, probably when commissioned by Jehovah to bury it (Deu. 34:6). We see and experience the conflict carried on between the friends and foes of truth and righteousness on earth. It is well to know that a similar contest is waged by invisible powers above us and among us. Such contests no less real because unseen. The horses and chariots were on the mountain round about Eiisha before the servants eyes were opened to see them. It is certain that Christs servants are aided on earth by angelic agents; but it is quite as certain that they are also hindered and opposed by invisible powers of a different character (1Th. 2:18; Rom. 16:20). Even when opposed by earthly adversaries, it is an encouragement to know that we are not alone in such an experience. Angels, who are greater in power and might, have also to contend against opposition while ministering to us and to the cause of Christ on earth.
[298] Withstood me (Dan. 10:13). Dr. Cox remarks that contests of this nature are mentioned in other places of Scripture, as Zec. 3:1-3; Jud. 1:9; Rev. 12:7-8. The angel lets the prophet catch a glimpse of the invisible struggles between the princes of the angels, in which it is decided who is to exert the determining influence on the worldly monarch (the king of Persia)whether the god-opposed spirit of this world, or the good spirit whose aim it is to further the interests of Gods kingdom.Auberlen; who adds: We are wont to speak in a spiritualising way of a struggle between the good and the evil spirit in man. Holy Scripture teaches us to regard such a struggle as real and substantial (compare 1Sa. 16:13-15; 1Ki. 22:22). The Satanic influences, of which we have more particular knowledge through the language of Christ and His apostles, are essentially not different from this. The liberty of human actions is not hereby taken away; for the spirits exercise no compelling influence on mens hearts, and their chief activity consists probably in the arrangement of outward events.
From the whole narrative we may learn
1. How glorious must be the place that forms the abode of those angelic beings to whom we are here introduced. The visible glory and splendour of the man clothed in linen (Dan. 10:5-6), whether a created or uncreated angel, suggests the glory of the place where such have their residence. A similar appearance is elsewhere ascribed to those angelic ministers; for example, Mat. 28:3. How glorious the throne which is attended by such exalted and resplendent ministers! How glorious the King! A picture of His glory, under a human form, perhaps presented to us in this chapter. The queen of Shebas burst of amazement and admiration on seeing the glory of Solomons court, likely to be far exceeded by the believers experience as he enters the heavenly glory: It was a true report that I heardand behold, the half was not told me. Happy are thy men, and happy are these thy servants that stand continually before thee, and that hear thy wisdom! Daniel fainted at the glorious vision of the man clothed in linen. [299] Believers beholding the King in His beauty shall be filled with joy unspeakable and full of glory.
[299] There remained no strength in me (Dan. 10:8). Keil observes that the effect which the appearance of the man clothed in linen had upon Daniel, formed a pre-intimation and a pledge of what would happen to his people in the future. As Daniel was thrown to the ground and raised up again by a supernatural hand, so should the people of God be thrown to the ground by the fearful judgments that should pass over them, but should again be raised up by the all-powerful help of their God and His angel-prince Michael, and should be strengthened to endure the tribulation.
2. Ample provision made for the welfare of the Church and for the success of the Redeemers cause. An agency is provided in the wisdom and love of God, and committed into the hands of the Mediator, which, though invisible, is always in operation, and is fully adequate to meet all requirements and exigencies. Such provision made in the ministration of angelic beings, who, though necessarily limited both in their power and knowledge, yet excel in strength as well as wisdom; and, while yielding implicit obedience to the will of their Sovereign, are also deeply and lovingly interested in the happiness of His people and the prosperity of His cause. Their influence also, as spiritual beings, is capable of being exercised as well on the mind as on material objects. It is true that in their ministrations they are resisted by beings of a similar nature, though of an opposite character and disposition. How effectually, however, the ministry of angels is exercised on behalf of the Church, is shown by numerous examples both in the Old and New Testaments, one of which is found in this very book (chap. Dan. 6:22).
3. The duty of imitating the character and conduct of those angelic ministers. A petition taught by the Saviour, and constantly on the lips of the professing Church, is, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. The book of Daniel, and especially the chapter before us, reveals how it is done there. We see these celestial beings not only promptly obedient to their Makers will, but cordially interested in whatever that will is, and especially in the work of ministering for the heirs of salvation about whom they are employed. Their obedience not only prompt but loving and hearty. What is done in obedience to the divine will is done heartily as to the Lord. Whatever the service on which they are sent, it is faithfully, zealously, and lovingly executed. Though thwarted and opposed for days and weeks together by hostile influences and wayward dispositions, they persevere in their mission till it is accomplished. It is our privilege to be engaged with them in serving the same Master, and in promoting the same objects. Like them we shall meet with opposition both from visible and invisible adversaries. Like them it is for us, through promised and provided grace, to persevere till our efforts are crowned with success, or we called away by the Master to another field of service.
4. The reverential spirit with which we ought to receive the communications of Gods word. Daniel relates that when the angel brought to him the divine communication with which he was charged, when he had spoken this word unto me, I stood trembling; and again, when he had spoken such words unto me, I set my face toward the ground, and became dumb (Dan. 10:11; Dan. 10:15). One of the marks of the truly godly given by God Himself as that with which He is well pleased, is, that they tremble at His word (Isa. 66:2). So Ezra speaks of the godly in his day (Ezr. 9:4; Ezr. 10:3). Striking contrast to the thoughtless indifference with which the divine oracles are too often read and heard. The deep humility, self-abasement, and godly fear that Daniel exhibited in relation to the divine communications which he received, a part of his general character, and that which doubtless prepared him for receiving those revelations by which he was so greatly honoured. Them that honour Me, I will honour.
5. The manifoldness of Scripture teaching. Not only in regard to our own race has the Holy Ghost been pleased to give us information in His word; but also in regard to an order of beings higher than ourselves in the scale of creation, and whose existence dates further back in the annals of the universe. [300] This information, too, the Scriptures afford us, not to gratify curiosity, nor even merely to augment our knowledge; but on account of the relation which those angelic beings bear to ourselves, and the important part assigned to them in connection with the human race, and more especially to that part of it who, like themselves, are engaged in the service of God. Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation? The information thus afforded us concerning angels calculated to exercise an important influence upon our spirit and daily walk, cheering us by the assurance of their presence and aid, and animating us by their holy and loving example (Psa. 34:7; Psa. 91:11-12; Ecc. 5:6; 1Co. 11:10).
[300] This information, given through Daniel, regarding angels has been made an argument against the genuineness of the book as belonging to a later age; the angels being said to appear quite in the form in which they were introduced from the later Parseism into Judea, with the distinction of higher and lower orders, and the names given to certain individuals among them. But, as Dr. Pusey observes, some distinction among those heavenly hosts was revealed from the first (Gen. 3:24). Also, there was one known as distinct from and above all the rest as the Angel of the Lord, whether God the Son, or (as Dr. Pusey thinks) a created angel, and especially Michael, in whom God accustomed His creatures to the thought of beholding Himself in human form. He thinks the one thing peculiar in Daniels revelations regarding angels is that, as God set one chief angel as the deputed guardian of His people, so He set others over the nations, assigning to each nation one of those ministering spirits to succour and defend them, and to plead their cause with Himself, the Father of all. He observes that it is agreed that the common title Amesha-Cpenta (or Amshaspands), the holy immortals, does not occur in the oldest part of the Zendavesta; and that the names by which they are severally distinguished occur there also as names of qualities or substances. Dr. Rule observes: It is a familiar saying with the Jews that their fathers brought up the names of angels out of Babylon; and, for anything we know to the contrary, it may be true that they brought them thence. But it would be an error to conclude that the Jews learned the names of angels from the Babylonians or from the Persians. At first sight, he remarks, it might seem probable that, as the later Persian religion, unlike the Assyrian, is distinguished by long lists of angels, good and bad, Persia might be the birthplace of angelology; and it might be conjectured that the inspired writers of the New Testament, who record the names of Gabriel and Michael, drew them from the same source as the Persians, or indeed from the Persians themselves. In the present case, the Persian documents of or before the age of Daniel, which are now accessible to us, are not known to disclose any information concerning angels names. As for Zoroaster, his date is not certainly known; but even if it was he who first taught the Persians that angels existed, and if he really flourished in the reign of Gushtaph or Darius Hystaspis, b.c. 521486, he was probably born a few years before the decease of Daniel, but had not yet been heard of in Daniels time; and the only probability is that he would be glad to borrow from the prophets writings anything to serve his own purpose. He concludes that angel were not known of in Babylonia, and therefore there could not have been angels names, except as the Babylonians and others learned them from the Hebrews.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER TEN
IV. ANGELIC ASSISTANCEDan. 10:1-21
a. ANGELIC APPEARANCE
TEXT: Dan. 10:1-9
1
In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing was true, even a great warfare: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision.
2
In those days I, Daniel, was mourning three whole weeks.
3
I ate no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine into my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all, till three whole weeks were fulfilled.
4
And in the four and twentieth day of the first month, as I was by the side of the great river, which is Hiddekel,
5
I lifted up mine eyes, and looked, and, behold, a man clothed in linen, whose loins were girded with pure gold of Uphaz:
6
his body also was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as flaming torches, and his arms and his feet like unto burnished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude.
7
And 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.
8
So I was left alone, and saw this great vision, and there remained no strength in me; for my comeliness was turned in me into corruption, and I retained no strength.
9
Yet heard I the voice of his words; and when I heard the voice of his words, then was I fallen into a deep sleep on my face, with my face toward the ground,
QUERIES
a.
Why was Daniel so upset by this vision?
b.
Who was the man Daniel saw?
c.
What does Daniel mean, my comeliness was turned in me into corruption?
PARAPHRASE
In the third year of the reign of Cyrus, king of Persia, Daniel (who had been named Belteshazzar by the Babylonians) had another vision. It was a vision but what was revealed would certainly come to pass in exact detail. This vision of future history concerned great suffering which was to come upon the people of God. Daniels understanding of this future history came to him by means of the vision given to him. In those days I, Daniel, continued in mourning for three full weeks. I ate none of the more pleasant foods; meat and wine did not cross my lips; I abstained completely from tending to the ease and comfort of my body and refrained from anointing myself until three full weeks were finished. And on the twenty-fourth day of Nisan (the first Jewish month), when I was standing beside the great Tigris River, I looked up and suddenly there before me stood a being in human form robed in pure white linen, with a wide belt of purest gold around his waist and his skin glowed like the Tarshish stone; from his face came blinding flashes like lightning, and his eyes glowed like flaming torches at night; his arms and feet glistened like polished brass, and his voice was like the roaring of a multitude of human voices or like the sea pounding the shore. But I, Daniel, alone saw this great vision; the men with men saw nothing; but they sensed that an unusual manifestation of some sort was taking place and they were suddenly filled with unreasoning terror and ran to hide, and I was left alone. When I saw this fearful vision my strength left me; and whatever appearance of health and strength I had left me. Then this being spoke to me, and I fell to the ground unconscious, face downward.
COMMENT
Dan. 10:1-3 IN THE THIRD YEAR OF CYRUS KING OF PERSIA . . . Leupold makes an interesting observation: The last three chapters of the book of Daniel contain the Last Revelation of Things to Come. Chapter ten is introductory; the body of this last revelation is found chiefly in chapter eleven; chapter twelve is a conclusion . . . There is hardly anything in the Bible that is just like these chapters, especially like chapter eleven. The word, the vision, and minute prediction are combined in a manner that is found nowhere else in the Scripture . . . Everything in chapter ten is preparatory to chapter eleven.
The Last Revelation of Things to Come is the last revelation of things to come upon the O.T. covenant people. Daniel recounts, in chapter eleven, in detail, the final centuries of Israels history as it relates to the Ptolemies and the Seleucids. Chapter ten is an introduction to that prediction of history to come.
In the third year of Cyrus . . . indicates that Daniel did not return to Palestine with the first increment of returnees under Zerubbabel, but remained in Babylon. He was now an old man, and God had yet another revelation to give him on behalf of the covenant people. When God revealed such exciting things and such terrible things concerning the future, the prophet was inspired to mark such a momentous revelation in terms of definite time and circumstances. Here the day and the month of the year are marked when the prophet was given this terrifying vision. In order to understand the full significance of this entire revelation concerning the Ptolemies and Seleucids and other enemies (Samaritans) of Gods people in the ending era of the O.T. covenant, one must understand that already obstacles (in the third year of Cyrus) had been placed in the way of the first returnees to Palestine. The Samaritans had tried to persuade Cyrus that the Jews he allowed to return to Palestine were plotting treason against his rule. God tells Daniel that much more tribulation and persecution is to come upon the Jews in their restoration before the Messiah comes. The Jews, with carnal mindedness, took Daniels prophecies in stride, endured the tribulations, but were hoping in a Messiah who would come to avenge all that took place during the abominations of the Seleucids. But Daniel never predicted a carnally-oriented Messiahhe predicted One who would accomplish spiritual victories (Dan. 9:24, etc.) and who Himself would be cut-off in the midst of the 70th week. Daniel intended to raise their hopes in Gods highest purpose in their livesbut they could not raise their vision above the worldly, so they applied the hopeful tone of Daniels prophecies to the carnal.
What Daniel saw was so unique he had to emphasize that the thing was true. The great warfare would be better translated the great suffering. The time of this suffering would be great or longin fact it would last nearly 200 years; from the time of Alexander the Great and the division of his empire, to the revolt of the Maccabeans.
The fact that Daniel was able to understand this vision caused him great turmoil of spirit. He mourned three whole weeks. Daniel put his body under subjection to conform to his spiritual penitence and sorrow. This harmony of the outward man with the inner man is most conducive to sincere communication with God. Daniel denied himself all forms of food and drink as well as the customary anointing at this particular time of the year (Passover).
Dan. 10:4-6 . . . BEHOLD, A MAN CLOTHED IN LINEN . . . On the 24th day of Nisan (the first month of the Jewish cal-endar) Daniel received this vision as he was beside the river Iigris (Hiddekel; cf. Gen. 2:14). The Passover feast begins on the 14th day of Nisan, followed by 7 days of unleavened bread, A very appropriate time for Daniel to mourn the coming tribulation of his people.
The being who appeared to Daniel with the revelation of God was dressed in linen (symbolizing purity); girded with pure gold (symbolizing high station); his body was like a rare gem from Tarshish (berly) (symbolizing association with royalty); his face flashed with startling brilliance like lightning (symbolizing truth); his eyes flamed like torches burning in the night, (symbolizing judgment); his arms and feet glistened like polished brass (symbolizing power); his voice thundered like a roar of the mighty sea (symbolizing power also). This being appeared in the human form of man. Some have taken him to be a pre-incarnate appearance of the Lord Jesus because this mans appearance and the Lords appearance in Rev. 1:13-15 are so similar. We believe, however, that this man was one of Gods mighty angelsone on a par with other mighty angels like Michael. See our discussion of pre-incarnate appearances of the Lord Jesus on Dan. 3:24-25. See also the Special Study on Angels at the end of this chapter.
Dan. 10:7-9 . . . AND THERE REMAINED NO STRENGTH IN ME . . . Why his companions could not see the vision we are at a loss to explain. Perhaps it was because of their limited spiritual attainmentsmore likely it was simply because the Divine being restricted by his own choice and ability his appearance to Daniel only, for Divine reasons. They participated in the event enough to realize the manifestation was supernatural and enough to cause them to quake with fear and flee to hide from omnipotence. A parallel to this is Paul and his companions on the road to Damascus (Act. 9:3 ff).
Daniel was severely affected by what he saw. Any sinner would be so affected, were he to come into contact with a holy being who had come from the presence of the Holiest of Holies. Many saints, both in the O.T. and N.T., expected sudden death when such a manifestation came to them. Such an appearance is not to be taken lightly. The directness of this revelation literally drained every bit of physical strength from Daniel. The prophet had to be resuscitated frequently to survive this experience. Whatever appearance of health and strength Daniel had disappeared. All the color left his face and when he heard the voice booming forth he fell flat on his face on the ground.
It would be well for those who treat visions from the Lord and visits from angels lightly, claiming many such visions indiscriminately, to note how severely even a saint like Daniel was affected. Some who have claimed such visions speak of them as if they were almost natural, everyday occurrences with no particular effects such as Daniel had. And it may be for this very purpose God moved Daniel to record what seems insignificant details to his own personthe absolute frailty of man in the presence of the holiness and the greatness of God. Isaiah knew it (Isa. 6:1-13); Jeremiah knew it (Jer. 1:4-19); time would fail to speak of those who knew such prostrate uncleanness when faced with the absolute holiness of GodMoses, Jacob, Paul, John, Peter, etc.
QUIZ
1.
Why mention the third year of Cyrus?
2.
What is the warfare Daniel saw in his vision?
3.
What was the time of year Daniel mourned and saw his vision?
4.
Why would the man Daniel saw not be the Lord Jesus?
5.
What portion of N.T. scripture parallels this vision of the heavenly being?
6.
How and why did the vision affect Daniel as it did?
7.
Why do you suppose the Lord moved Daniel to record his reaction to the vision?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(1) A thing.A revelation, as Dan. 9:25. The contents of the revelation are specified in the perplexing words, the thing was true, and the time appointed (comp. Dan. 8:12) was long, by which is meant apparently that truth and long tribulation were the subject of their vision. Time appointed is translated warfare (Isa. 40:2), and is here used in the same sense, meaning hardship or tribulation. This revelation, however, speaks of the warfare which not Israel only, but all Gods people must undergo before the coming of the Messiah in His kingdom.
And he understood.Comp. Dan. 8:27. It appears from Dan. 12:8 that the whole was not understood by him. Certainly the duration of the tribulation was not clearly revealed to the prophet, though he received enigmatic declarations respecting it (Dan. 12:10, &c.).
I . . . was mourning.It is needless to suppose that Daniels fast was in consequence of some breaches of the passover ritual, of which his people had been guilty. The Jews were involved in troubles, and had committed sins of faithlessness which justified the prophet in turning to God with fasting and praying. At Jerusalem there were the factious oppositions offered to the newly returned colonists, of which we read in the book of Ezra. They experienced the want of spiritual guides (Ezr. 2:63) in one very important matter; nor need we doubt that the circumstances mentioned in Ezr. 4:1-6 had occasioned many complications. But there was in Israel the sin of faithessness to Gods promises, which grieved the aged seers heart. The number of those who had obeyed the prophets command, Go ye forth from Babylon (Isa. 48:20), was comparatively insignificant, and those who should have been foremost in leading their fellow-countrymennamely, the Leviteshad preferred the life in Babylon to the trials and hardships of rebuilding their own city (Ezr. 2:40; comp. Ezr. 8:15).
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
1. For Cyrus see our Introduction to Daniel, III, 3, (6), and note Dan 6:28; for Daniel Belteshazzar see Introduction, II, 8; III, 1, and notes Dan 1:7; Dan 2:26. Bosanquet ( Messiah the Prince) thinks this verse is an interpolation, being opposed to Dan 9:2; Zec 1:12; but this is not probable, as the versions differ no more here than in other passages.
Thing Or, word.
But the time appointed was long R.V., “even great warfare.” The obscurity of the text may be seen by the fact that Hebrew scholars of the greatest renown have variously rendered this phrase, “and the word is truth, and great distress; and he heeded the word and gave heed to the vision;” or, “and truth is the revelation and (the) distress is great; and understand thou the revelation, and understand it in the vision.” The R.V., however, is a good translation of the Hebrew text as it stands, and makes good sense. The “warfare” referred to is that between Gabriel and the guardian angel of Persia of which the prophet now hears for the first time. (See Dan 10:13 and chap. 11.)
Third year Various reasons have been given, such as his great age and the need of his services in Babylon, why Daniel had not returned back to the Holy Land with his companions; but this question is not raised at all in the narrative. His “sorrow” seems as great as it had been in the reign of Darius, before the edict was given by Cyrus for the return of the Jews to their native land. (See notes Dan 10:2-4; Dan 9:1-4.) There is no necessary contradiction to history here. Such a return as was actually accomplished was very different from the triumphant victories which, according to Jeremiah’s prophecy, might have been expected by an exilic prophet. (See notes Dan 9:2; Dan 9:24.)
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘In the third year of Cyrus, king of Persia, a word was revealed to Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar, and the word was true. It was about a great warfare (literally ‘even a great warfare’). And he understood the word and had understanding of the vision.”
The change of method of dating suggests either that Darius the Mede was Cyrus, or more likely that Darius the Mede was no longer the ruler of Babylon, having died or been replaced. Note that Cyrus is not called the king of Babylon, whereas Darius had been (Dan 9:1). Daniel makes clear distinctions. ‘King of Persia’ is an attested title for such a ruler.
It is noteworthy that Daniel has not returned with the exiles. If the account was fictitious we would expect that he would be depicted as so returning, so that this is a strong affirmation of the genuineness of the account.
Here we learn that ‘a word’ from God was revealed to Daniel, a word that was true. The latter statement, which is unusual, suggests that on this occasion Daniel felt the need to emphasise the truth of what he had seen. This may also explain his reference to himself as Belteshazzar. He wanted his credentials to be appreciated, and most knew him as Belteshazzar. What was revealed was a great warfare. This most probably refers to the supernatural warfare described in the chapter, which parallels warfare on earth. Others see it as referring to a struggle within Daniel himself. ‘Understood’ may mean simply that he apprehended it and was able to write it down (compare Dan 12:8).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Dan 10:1 In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing was true, but the time appointed was long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision.
Dan 10:1
[124] Jack Martin Balcer, “Cyrus the Great,” in The World Book Encyclopedia, vol. 4 (Chicago: World Book, Inc., 1994), 1208.
Isa 44:26-28, “That confirmeth the word of his servant, and performeth the counsel of his messengers; that saith to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be inhabited; and to the cities of Judah, Ye shall be built, and I will raise up the decayed places thereof: That saith to the deep, Be dry, and I will dry up thy rivers: That saith of Cyrus , He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid.”
Isa 45:1, “Thus saith the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut;”
Ezr 1:1-2, “Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled, the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing, saying, Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, The LORD God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth; and he hath charged me to build him an house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah.”
Dan 10:1 “and the thing was true” Comments – The word “thing” is also translated into modern English as “a revelation” ( NIV), or “a message” ( NASB).
Those who have entered Heaven and the spiritual realm talk of a higher level of perception and knowledge that man cannot achieve upon earth. People testify of recognizing individuals in Heaven before meeting them, of being aware of the thoughts of others, etc. When Daniel had this vision recorded in 10-12, he introduces it with a certainty that speaks from the eternal realm, a realm where only truth exists. Daniel speaks as one who is in eternity when he says, “and the thing was true.”
Dan 10:2 In those days I Daniel was mourning three full weeks.
Dan 10:3 Dan 10:3
Dan 10:3 Word Study on “bread” Strong says the Hebrew word “bread” “lechem” ( ) (H3899) means, “bread, grain.” The Enhanced Strong says this commonly used word is found 297 times in the Old Testament, being translated in the KJV as “bread 237, food 21, meat 18, shewbread+6440 5, shewbread+4635 3, showbread 2, loaves 5, victuals 2, eat 1, feast 1, fruit 1, provision 1.”
Dan 10:3 Word Study on “flesh” Strong says the Hebrew word “flesh” “basar” ( ) (H1320) means, “flesh,” and by extension, “body, person.” The Enhanced Strong says this commonly used word is found 269 times in the Old Testament, being translated in the KJV as “flesh 256, body 2, fatfleshed + 01277 2, leanfleshed + 01851 2, kin 2, leanfleshed + 07534 1, mankind + 0376 1, myself 1, nakedness 1, skin 1.”
Dan 10:3 Word Study on “wine” Strong says the Hebrew word “wine” “yayin” ( ) (3196) means, “effervesce, wine.” The Enhanced Strong says this commonly used word is found 140 times in the Old Testament, being translated in the KJV as “wine 138, banqueting 1, winebibbers + 05433 1.”
Dan 10:3 Comments – In order to better understand the foods that Daniel set aside during fasted, it is helpful to look back at the first story of Daniel refusing the king’s portion of delicacies and choosing to each vegetables and drink water. The king feasted upon meats and wine and this was the very foods that Daniel fasted from in Dan 10:3. Thus, Daniel very likely ate some of the same simple foods during his three-week fast that he did in Dan 1:12.
Dan 1:5, “And the king appointed them a daily provision of the king’s meat, and of the wine which he drank : so nourishing them three years, that at the end thereof they might stand before the king.”
Dan 1:12, “Prove thy servants, I beseech thee, ten days; and let them give us pulse to eat, and water to drink .”
Dan 10:2-3 Comments – Daniel’s Mourning and Fast – Why was Daniel seeking God and fasting in Dan 10:2-3? The angel will later explain by saying, “thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God” (Dan 10:12).
Dan 10:12, “Then said he unto me, Fear not, Daniel: for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God , thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words.”
The immediate context reveals that this was the third year of the reign of King Cyrus (Dan 10:1), and it was the first month of the Jewish year (Dan 10:4) in which the Passover is celebrated on the fourteenth day of this month (Lev 25:3).
Lev 23:5, “In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD’S passover.”
During the first year of the reign of King Darius (538 B.C.), the Lord had revealed to Daniel that the Jewish captivity in Babylon was ending after seventy years (Dan 9:1-27). Two years later in 536 B.C. King Cyrus had given a royal decree freeing the Jews to return to Jerusalem and build the city (Ezr 1:1-4). In the third year of King Cyrus (535-534 B.C.), Daniel is again mourning and fasting. It is very possible that Daniel, who would have understood the impact of this decree issued two years earlier, believed the Jews were not responsive enough in returning to restore Jerusalem (see Albert Barnes). The revelation that God will give Daniel in 10-12 helps him to understand that Israel’s full restoration will not take place until the distant future.
Dan 10:4 And in the four and twentieth day of the first month, as I was by the side of the great river, which is Hiddekel;
Dan 10:4
Gen 2:14, “And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates.”
Dan 10:5 Then I lifted up mine eyes, and looked, and behold a certain man clothed in linen, whose loins were girded with fine gold of Uphaz:
Dan 10:5
[125] Thomas Hunter Weir, “Uphaz,” in International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, ed. James Orr (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., c1915, 1939), in The Sword Project, v. 1.5.11 [CD-ROM] (Temple, AZ: CrossWire Bible Society, 1990-2008).
Jer 10:9, “Silver spread into plates is brought from Tarshish, and gold from Uphaz , the work of the workman, and of the hands of the founder: blue and purple is their clothing: they are all the work of cunning men.”
Dan 10:6 His body also was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude.
Dan 10:7 Dan 10:7
Dan 10:8 Therefore I was left alone, and saw this great vision, and there remained no strength in me: for my comeliness was turned in me into corruption, and I retained no strength.
Dan 10:8
Act 9:7, “And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.”
Act 26:14, “And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.”
Dan 10:13 But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.
Dan 10:13
Dan 10:21 But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.
Dan 10:21
Comments – Thus, we have a Scriptural basis for saying that God has a royal book in Heaven in which He has written His divine plan of redemption for mankind.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Glorification: The Coming of Christ (Daniel’s Private Visions) – There are two main divisions to the book of Daniel. Daniel 1-6 is primarily narrative material and emphasizes Daniel’s ministry to the kings of Babylon and Media. In these passages he interprets two dreams and the writing on the wall for two kings. This division as well contains three stories of the captivity and persecution of Daniel and his three friends. However, the visions recorded in Daniel 7-12 were not for the kings. Rather, they are a collection of private visions of apocalyptic in nature that Daniel received from the Lord regarding the Time of the Gentiles and the Last Days. They were not delivered to the kings under whom he served, but were initially private in nature. Their emphasis is not on the nation of Israel; but rather, upon the fulfillment of the Times of the Gentiles. The fact that the first section was written in Aramaic and the second section in Hebrew suggests that there were initially two different intended recipients. The Babylonian Jews would have found comfort in both divisions as they saw the sovereign power of God at work in their midst and as they understood by prophecy that God had not forsaken the nation of Israel. Note that this second section has been arranged in chronological order independently of the first section’s chronological arrangement.
Daniel 7-12 is a collection of private visions given to Daniel concerning the future glorification of Jesus Christ and His children and the Great White Throne Judgment of the nations. The redemptive role of Jesus Christ is clearly predicted as the Son of Man comes upon the clouds and approaches the Ancient of Days (Dan 7:13) and He establishes the everlasting Kingdom of Heaven (Dan 7:14).
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The Vision of Future Wars Up Until Christ’s Second Return (535-534 B.C.) Dan 10:1 to Dan 12:13 records Daniel’s most lengthy vision about the future wars between the kings of the North and the South. The traditional interpretation of this lengthy vision is that it represents a conflict, first between Persia and Greece, and then between two kingdoms that rise up out of the Grecian Empire, the Seleucid Empire of Syria and the Ptolemaic Empire of Egypt (Dan 11:4-20). History records the many battles that took place. The continual wars that took place between these two powers deeply affected the Jewish people since they were situated between them. Their land would be taken and retaken in these ongoing conflicts and battles, causing many problems for them. These conflicts are believed to carry on until the time of the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, a great enemy of the Hebrew people. In Dan 11:21-35 we are given the description of Antiochus Epiphanes and his violent acts against the Jews.
Many scholars suggest that Dan 11:36-45 refers to the antichrist figure that will arise during the Tribulation Period, whom Paul calls the Son of Perdition. Within this context, the king of the North would refer to Gog and his army that surrounds Jerusalem during the Battle of Armageddon, as described in Ezekiel 38-39.
At this point the vision comes to a close with a few brief remarks about the last times and the coming of the Lord and the final Day of Judgment. Thus, the first few verses of Daniel 12 tell us that this is a time of trouble, which we now call the Tribulation Period. It makes a brief refer to the Rapture of the Church and the Great White Throne Judgment.
This lengthy vision that Daniel is given takes biblical prophecy up to the Second Coming of the Messiah when the “Times of the Gentiles” will come to an end. Thus, we see how the book of Daniel deals with prophecies limited to the Times of the Gentiles.
Outline – Note the proposed outline by William MacDonald regarding this interpretation: [123]
[123] William MacDonald, Daniel, in Believer’s Bible Commentary, ed. Arthur Farstad (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Pub., 1995), in Libronix Digital Library System, v. 2.1c [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp., 2000-2004), “Introduction.”
1. Introduction of the Vision Dan 10:1-9
2. Prophecies of the Immediate Future Dan 10:10 to Dan 11:35
a) Greece’s Conquest of Medo-Persia Dan 10:10 to Dan 11:3
b) The Decay of the Grecian Empire Dan 11:4-35
i) The Wars between Egypt and Syria Dan 11:4-20
ii) The Reign of Antiochus Epiphanes Dan 11:21-35
3. Prophecies of the Distant Future Dan 11:36 to Dan 12:13
a) The Antichrist Dan 11:36-45
b) The Great Tribulation Dan 12:1-13
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The Beginning of the Vision
v. 1. In the third year of Cyrus, king of Persia, v. 2. In those days I, Daniel, was mourning three full weeks, v. 3. I ate no pleasant bread, v. 4. And in the four and twentieth day of the first month, v. 5. then I lifted up mine eyes and looked, v. 6. His body also was like the beryl, v. 7. And I, Daniel, alone saw the vision, v. 8. Therefore I was left alone and saw this great vision, v. 9. Yet heard I the voice of His words; and when I heard the voice of His words, then was I in a deep sleep on my face, and my face toward the ground.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
Dan 10:1-21
THE ANGELS OF THE NATIONS.
The three chapters (10, 11; and 12.) form a section apart from the rest of Daniel. One marked peculiarity is the long and very old interpolation which occupies nearly the whole of Dan 11:1-45. Not improbably something has dropped out, and. not a few things have been modified in consequence of this interpolation.
Dan 10:1
In the third year of Cyrus King of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing was true, but the time appointed was long; and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision. The Septuagint rendering is, “In the first year of Cyrus King of the Persians.” This is at variance with all other versions. As, however, these other versions are derived from the Palestinian recension, they unitedly do not much more than counterbalance the LXX, “A decree () was revealed to Daniel who was called Beltasar, and the vision is true and the decree.” This is a case of doublet. Evidently some Egyptian manuscripts read (hazon) instead of (haddabar), and this, or the rendering of it, has slipped into the text from the margin. “And a strong multitude understood the decree.” The translator here has had , not , before him. Aquila has the same reading; here (tzaba) is taken in its usual sense of “host,” “And I understood it in vision.” Here the LXX. has instead of . From the fact that the first person appears in the next verse, there is at least a probability in favour of this reading. Theodotion is, as usual, closer to the Massoretic. is rendered . The text before him has had , the hophal, instead of , which is possibly the kal. The Peshitta seems to have used a text practically identical with that of the Massoretes; tile same is true of the Vulgate. The Peshitta renders by heel, and the Vulgate by fortitudo. In the third year of Cyrus. The various reading of the Septuagint is of value. It is not to be dismissed as due to a desire to harmonize this date with that in Dan 1:21, for the numeral “third” might easily be an accidental mistake present in some few Palestinian manuscripts due to the beginning of the eighth chapter. The first chapter, as we have seen, has many traces that it is at once an epitome and a compilation. It is evident that the writer in the first chapter would have the rest of the book before him, and would mean to harmonize his statements with that of the chapter before us. It seems difficult to imagine that the compiler of the first chapter could have this statement before him, and yet write as he did. We should therefore be inclined to leave the question doubtful. Even if it should be admitted that the Massoretic date is correct, as we have already seen, the difficulties created are by no means insuperable. Hitzig has made it a difficulty that Daniel did not avail himself of the permission to return to his own country, granted by Cyrus. Professor Bevan says, “For those who believe Daniel to be an ideal figure, no explanation is necessary.” In that assertion he is mistaken. If Daniel were presented as an ideal Jew, why does he not conform to the ideal of Judaism? The statement that Daniel was a man of nearly ninety years of age at the date of Cyrus‘s proclamation is a sufficient answer to this difficulty. Hitzig thinks he rebuts this answer of Havernick’s by referring to the old men (Ezr 3:12) who remembered the former temple; but these might have been children of ten or twelve when they were carried away captive eighteen years after Daniel, and thus might not be more than sixty when Cyrus’s decree came. Further, we know that only a very limited number of Jews returned, and that so many of the best of the Jews remained that it was declared that the chaff came to Jerusalem, but that the finest of the wheat remained in Babylon. A thing was revealed unto Daniel whose name was called Belteshazzar. “Thing” is the general term dabar, which means sometimes “decree,” sometimes “word,” or sometimes, as rendered by the Authorized, ” thing.” As Professor Fuller remarks, this is to be taken as the title of the rest of the remaining sections. The recurrence of the Babylonian name “Belteshazzar” may be due to the recency of the overthrow of the Babylonian monarchy. And the thing was true, but the time appointed was long. Hitzig thinks that in the first clause the author betrays his standpoint, as he would not know the thing was true till fact had proved it so. But, besides that an editor might have added this clause, a man might well be certain of the truth of a thing he had got from God; he might wish to impress this upon his hearers. The last clause here is certainly mistranslated in the Authorized. The time appointed was long. (tzaba) never means “appointed time,” although it is twice translated so in Job, as here; but in all these cases with greater accuracy render “warfare.” With this sense is to be compared the use we find in Num 15:23 -43, where the Levites’ service in the sanctuary is called (tzaba). If we are to keep to the Massoretic reading, then the rendering of the Revised is really the only one to be thought of. Professor Bevan, following Ewald, thinking that tzaba means in Num 8:1 :4 “temple service,” would apply this meaning here. As we saw, in considering that verse, the word there was of very doubtful authenticity, we need not apply that meaning here, as it would only suit by being twisted into “obligation.” Hitzig, Kranichfeld, Zckler, Keil, and others regard this word as meaning “difficulty,” “oppression.” Something may, however, be said for the Septuagint rendering, all the more that it was adopted by Aquila. According to these renderings, we conjoin these words, great hosts, , with the next, which they understand read as third person singular imperfect kal, or omit the conjunction, “And a great multitude understood the decree.” “The host” in this interpretation would here naturally mean “the host of heaven.” We find that throughout this chapter, and in the twelfth, we have to do with the angels, so it is natural that in this title and summary of what is to follow the fact that the great host of heaven understood this mystery should be stated. Theodotion’s rendering, “power,” though supported by Jerome in the Vulgate, need not detain us. The view of Jephet-ibn-Ali is that the host may be of Edom, probably meaning by this Rome. And he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision. This is a fairly correct rendering of the Hebrew. Von Lengerke would make the verbs imperative, which certainly they might be, so far as form goes, but the intrusion of imperatives here into the title of a section seems violent. The main difficulty, moreover, is not touched. As they stand, these two clauses assert the same thing, and if with Yon Lengerke we make them both imperatives, we have the difficulty still present with us. It may be a case of “doublet.“ This is an hypothesis we scarcely would adopt except in necessity, since the Septuagint has both clauses. Theodotion, however, has only one of them. We feel ourselves inclined to follow the reading of the Septuagint. The angels understood the matter, and heDanielunderstood it also by the vision.
Dan 10:2
In those days I Daniel was mourning three full weeks. The versions are close to the Massoretic, only the Septuagint, and, following it, the Vetus, as quoted by Tertullian, omit “days,” in the literal rendering of the Hebrew phrase, “weeks of days”. Mourning. Zckler and Fuller think this mourning due to the difficulties the released captives had in carrying out their desire of rebuilding the temple. It may have been that he was grieved that so few of the people were willing to avail themselves of the privilege. We are here assuming that the chronology of this passage reckons from the overthrow of Nabunahid, that is, from Cyrus’s accession to the throne of Babylon; but, as we have seen, this “third year” may be reckoned from his assumption of the title King of Persia, San Parsua, in which case it may be the same year with that vision narrated in the previous chapter. Three full weeks; literally, three weeks of daysto mark off the duration of Daniel’s fast from the weeks of years referred to in the ninth chapter. Keil objects to this interpretation, but assigns no reason. At the same time, it is to be observed that “year of days” means a full year, but a week is such a short period that the necessity of saying that it was complete by defining it a “week of days” is not so obvious, and is unexampled.
Dan 10:3
I ate no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine in my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all, till three whole weeks were fulfilled. The versions are in perfect agreement with the Massoretic text. Pleasant bread; “bread of desires” is the rendering of the Septuagint and of Theodotion; the word is the same in Hebrew and Greek as that applied to Daniel. Neither came flesh nor wine in my mouth. This shows that the practice adopted by Daniel and his fellows during their training was not regarded by Daniel, at least as incumbent on him after he could regulate his own affairs. His ordinary habit was to eat flesh and to drink wine; but during these weeks of fast, he denied himself these dainties. Neither did I anoint myself at all, till three whole weeks were fulfilled. The pleasure of anointing the body with oil was highly esteemed among the ancients. It is impossible to fail to recognize, in this passage, the origin of the Essenian discipline. The Essenes abstained, from flesh, from wine, and from anointing themselves. Daniel thus abstained, as a sign of sorrow for the sin of his people; they made this fast a perpetual discipline. They waited for the salvation of Israel, and endeavoured, by fasting, to hasten the coming of the Lord. The converse of this, that Daniel’s fast is derived from the Essene discipline, is not to be thought of. It is a sign of a later development, when such practices of self-denial, from being the incidents of a life which occur on special occasions, become its rule. As early as b.c. 106 an Essene is mentioned teaching in the temple, and mentioned with no evidence that his sect was a thing of recent origin. The limits are narrow between the critical date of Daniel and this date that within them so prominent a sect as the Essenes should spring up.
Dan 10:4
And in the four and twentieth day of the first month, as I was by the side of the great river, which is Hiddekel. The LXX. differs from this only in rendering Hiddekel by its Greek name “Tigris.” Theodotion subjoins to Tigris Eddekel, on the same principle that we have on the margin of our Bibles different renderings from those in the text. The Peshitta makes the river the Euphrates. The Vulgate follows the Septuagint. There seems no reasonable doubt that Behrmann is right in regarding the Phrat of the Syriac as a gloss. It certainly was a natural suggestion, that, as Babylon was on the Euphrates, Daniel should rather be found walking there at the termination of his fast, than forty or fifty miles off. The four and twentieth day of the first month; that is, the month Nisan or Abibthe month in which the Passover was celebrated in every Jewish home. It would seem that Daniel did not join in this festival at this time. It is noted that, from the days of Saul, the two first days of every month were devoted to a feast, and hence, that Daniel’s fast could only begin on the third day. Since-he mast have refrained from partaking of the Paschal lamb, we cannot deduce that he might not occupy the opening days of the month with sadness rather than feasting. If Daniel is an ideal figure, intended to represent the model Jew resident in a foreign land, why is he thus represented as not partaking of the Paschal feast? It is true that, with the temple in ruins, the Paschal lamb could not be slain in the way enjoined in the Law; but the modern Jew keeps the Passover without the lamb. I was by the side of the great river, which is Hiddekel. The name is a transference of the Assyrian name Iddiklat. It would seem that Daniel was then on the banks of the Tigris, not in vision, but in actual person, as here there is no reference, as in Dan 8:2, to his being there in vision; the mention of attendants also renders it unlikely that it was only in vision that Daniel was on the banks of the Tigris. His purpose in being there was probably governmental, as he had attendants with him.
Dan 10:5, Dan 10:6
Then I lifted up mine eyes, and looked, and behold a certain man clothed in linen, whose loins were girded with fine gold of Uphas: his body also was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude. The version given by the Septuagint exhibits traces of confluence, “And it was [apparently reading (vayyehee)] on the four and twentieth day of the first month, I was upon the bank of the great river Tigris, and I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and behold a man clothed in fine linen (), and girt about the loins with fine linen (), and from his middle there was light, and his month was as the sea, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, his arms and feet as gleaming brass, and the voice () of his speech as the voice of a multitude.” It would seem that the translator had twice; that might be due to blunder, or may be a case of doubleta phenomenon so frequent. The difficult word Uphaz, which only occurs elsewhere in Jer 10:9, is omitted; “from his middle there was light” is probably an effort to render this clause, which the translator seems to have read mithoq ‘or. Possibly the mysterious clause, “and his mouth was like the sea,” may be another attempt to render these unaccustomed words. Theodotion merely transliterates into , and into , and regards Uphaz as a garment, which, in the case before us, was golden (). In the Syriac of the Peshitta, the translator escapes the difficulty of baddeem by rendering it “glory.” The next clause is also paraphrastic, “the girdle of his loins (back) was of splendid magnificence:” this last is his rendering of Uphaz. The next verse does not call for remark. Jerome, in the Vulgate, renders tarsheesh as chrysolithusan interpretation very generally followed now. In the Massoretic text, the use of the numeral “one,” almost as our indefinite article, has to be noted. Baddeem is the plural of a word used mainly for the material of which the garments of the priests were made; it occurs also in the vision of Ezekiel. The singularity is that in Ezekiel, as in Daniel, the word is always plural whereas in the rest of Scripture it is always singular. Uphaz occurs, as above mentioned, only in Jer 10:9; it is by some supposed to be a variation on Ophir. As here, it is connected in Jeremiah with Tarshish. Fiirst suggests paz, “fine gold” (Job 28:17), and . “coast or island,” thus making it equivalent to “Gold Coast.” Kethem, “fine gold,” is associated in Isa 13:12 with “Ophir,” as here with” Uphaz;” this might hint at the identity of the two places. That, however, is an uncertain basis. The fact that Tarshish and Uphaz are brought together, would indicate that, like Tarshish, it was in Spain. Kneucker, in Schenkel’s ‘Bibellexikon,’ decides for Hy-phasis, South Arabia, on the uncertain ground of the sound of the name. Bochart would place it in Ceylon, because Ptolemy mentions a harbour and river of the name of Phasis. Tarshish is the Tartessus of the Greeks and the modern Tharsis; here the chrysolite or topaz, as brought from thence. Margelothayo, “his feet,” is the most common rendering; but yon Lengerke would render, “the place where his feet rested”a rendering which, while it suits the form of the word, does not suit the context. It occurs four times in Ruth in one connection, and not elsewhere, save here. “Like in colour to polished brass” is a phrase which occurs in Eze 1:7. Professor Bevan says, “What meaning the author attached to (qalal),’ ‘polished,’ it is impossible to say.” All the versions render” gleaming,” in both passages; there seems no need to suggest a corruption of the text. The vision here has a great resemblance, though with many pointsof contrast, to Eze 1:4-25; Eze 8:2; Eze 9:2; Eze 10:1-22. Many passages in the Apocalypse show traces of its influence: thus Rev 1:14, Rev 1:15, the appearance of our Lord; also Rev 10:1-3. The vision in Eze 1:1-28. is a theophany; this, however, is not the appearance of a direct symbol of God, but the appearance of one of his angels. The whole aspect is one of terror and splendour. It has been noted that the yellow gleam of the topaz suits well the tint of the Oriental complexion. When we compare this with Ezekiel’s vision, we find a reticence in Ezekiel’s description; he does not affirm (Eze 1:27) that it is a man he sees, but only one in human likeness. Whereas Daniel distinctly says that it was a man. In the case of Ezekiel, it was a theophany which he saw; it was an angelophany which appeared to Daniel. “The voice of a multitude” refers to the sound of the shout of a multitude; the effect it produces is not merely the volume of sound, but the difference of tones and the difference of moment of utterance give a sense of vastness and multitudinousness, always impressive, and indeed awe-inspiring.
Dan 10:7
And I Daniel alone saw the vision; for the men that were with me saw not the vision.; but a great quaking fell upon them, so that they fled to hide themselves. The LXX. in the main agrees with this, but seems to have read lemahar, “in haste,” instead of behayhabay. Theodotion renders the last word , implying that he read behaga’. The reading of the Massoretic is superior, as being less expected. The Peshitta renders in accordance with Theodotion. Jerome agrees very exactly with the Massoretic text. And I Daniel alone saw the vision (comp. Act 9:7; Act 22:9). The Apostle Paul was solitary in hearing intelligible words and seeing Christ; his attendants saw the bright light and heard a voice, but neither saw the speaker nor were able to distinguish the purport of the words. For the men that were with me saw not the vision. Who those were that were with Daniel we cannot tell; probably they were the ordinary attendants of an officer of rank in the court of the great king. Rashi’s idea that they were Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, has no probability in favour of it. As little has Professor Fuller’s hint that they were Hananiah, Michael, and Azariah. But a great quaking fell upon them, so that they fled to hide themselves (comp. Exo 20:18; Gen 3:8). A yet finer parallel is Job 4:12-16. Eliphaz there describes a spirit passing before him, although invisible; yet in the horror of contact with the spiritual, all his bones shook and the hair of his flesh stood up. There is a difference to be noted hero between the conduct of the attendants of Daniel and those of the Apostle Paul. As we read here, the attendants of Daniel flee to hide themselves, those of the apostle are first struck to the earth and then stand stupefied.
Dan 10:8
Therefore I was left alone, and saw this great vision, and there remained no strength in me; for my comeliness was turned in me into corruption, and I retained no strength. The versions do not call for much remark. The LXX. renders “glory” by “spirit” or “breath;” and the Peshitta renders it by “body.” The Massoretic is superior, as more difficult and more likely to be the source of the other two than either of them. Theodotion’s rendering, , confirms this. Daniel explains how he alone had seen the vision, and narrates the effects contact with the spiritual had on him, “There remained no strength in me; And I retained no strength”a redoubled statement of weakness not necessarily meaning, as Jephet-ibn-Ali would have it, that the one refers to his inability to flee like his attendants, and the other to his inability to stand upright. It is probably due merely to the great impression this sudden powerlessness made on him. For my comeliness was turned in me into corruption. From the natural brightness of the skin in life the face assumed the yellow pallor of death (comp. Dan 7:28). “And my countenance was changed in me;” comp. also Hab 3:16, “When I heard, my belly trembled; my lips quivered at the voice: rottenness entered into my bones.” While the ideas here are the same, the parallelism is made more striking by the difference of the terms.
Dan 10:9
Yet heard I the voice of his words: and when I heard the voice of his words, then was I in a deep sleep on my face, and my face toward the ground. The Septuagint rendering here is briefer than the Massoretic, “And I heard the sound of his speech (, ‘ talking’), and I was fallen upon my face upon the earth.” The Septuagint translator seems to have read (nephalti) instead of (nir’dam). Theodotion is somewhat nearer the Massoretic text, but renders nirdam by “stupefied.” The Pesifitta is an accurate rendering of the text behind the Septuagint. Jerome agrees with Theodotion, rendering nirdam by consternatus; he strengthens the phrase, “my face toward the ground,” by inserting haerebat. It would seem that nirdam is of doubtful authenticity. It may be said this was omitted because of the difficulty of imagining the prophet seeing while in a deep sleep. But a state of sleep does not preclude the possibility of seeing a vision. In the parallel passage (Dan 8:18) the LXX. has no difficulty in translating, . By assuming the reading of the LXX. and the Peshitta to be correct, we make the process of events more natural; according to the Massoretic reading, though we have an account of his sense of weakness, we have no record that he fell to the ground, and yet we are told that he was “in a deep sleep, with his face toward the ground” The resemblance is very great to Job 4:12, “A thing was secretly brought to me, and mine ear received a little thereof in thoughts from the vision of the night, when sleep falleth on men (, tardaymah).“ If there has been imitation, the originality and beauty of the passage in Job render it certain that it is the original. It seems more likely to be a change introduced to bring the revelation to Daniel in line with other prophetic revelations. The attitude Daniel assumed was one which implied the deepest abasementthe envoy of the great king kisses the ground at the feet of the envoy of the King of kings. Even the revelation given while sleep had fallen on the subject of the revelation, seems paralleled with what took place at the Transfiguration (Luk 9:32, “And Peter and those that were with him were heavy with sleep,” yet it was when they were awaked that they saw the glory). So with Gethsemane. The Hebrew word is the same as that used when Eve was taken out of the side of Adam; he then was asleepa deepsleep had fallen on him, (tardaymah).“ (For further illustrations, see Eze 1:28; Eze 3:23; Zec 4:1; Rev 1:17.)
Dan 10:10
And, behold, an hand touched me, which set me upon my knees and upon the palms of my hands. The LXX. agrees with this, but does not bring out any more than this the pregnant sense of the Hebrew. This is given in the margin of the Revised, “Set me tottering on my knees,” etc. Strangely enough, the LXX. renders, “soles of my feet “an impossible attitude; that this is the true reading of the LXX. is confirmed by Paulus Telleusis. Theodotion omits “the palms of the hands.” The Peshitta renders as the LXX. The Vulgate renders by articulos, “joints.” An hand touched me. The hand of him that appeared to himthough Daniel does not say. It is needless to multiply angelic agencies. A discussion has been raised on the question whether this is Gabriel who appeared to Daniel in the eighth chapter, or Michael, or the angel of the presence. It is not a matter of importance, but Michael is excluded by verse 13, and also, to our thinking, “the angel of the presence,” if by that title the Second Person of the Trinity is indicated. Which set me upon my knees and upon the palms of my hands. Although the touch communicated to Daniel some strength, yet he was unable to raise himself so as to look uphis face was still to the ground, his attitude was still one of abasement, and he was trembling.
Dan 10:11
And he said unto me, O Daniel, a man greatly beloved, understand the words that I speak unto thee, and stand upright: for unto thee am I dew sent. And when he had spoken this word unto me, I stood trembling. The versions do not afford cause for remark. O Daniel, a man greatly beloved. This is the same term as that applied to Daniel (Dan 9:23), “man of desires” (which see). Understand the words that I speak unto thee; “have understanding in the words,” or better, “matters, which I am speaking or telling to thee.” As the language used was one intelligible to Daniel, it was needless to command him to understand the words, but the “matters” communicated by the words might require a special effort of attention to comprehend. Debareem means “matters” as well as “words.” And stand upright; “‘stand upon thy standing.” Gesenius would render this word when it occurs before (Dan 8:18), “place;” but both here and there the contrast is in the attitude. From being absolutely prone, as in the eighth chapter, or on hands and knees as here, he is to be upright, and, taking his previous attitude into account, this is not merely to stand where he is, and neither approach nor depart. The LXX. renders, ; Theodotion, ; the Vulgate has gradu. For unto thee am I now sent. This assigns a reason for the command to stand upon his feet. In the Assyrian marbles, however lowly the obeisance made to the monarch by any one admitted to his presence, he stands when he receives the monarch’s commands. Standing implies attention. And when he had spoken this word unto me, I stood trembling. He obeyed the command, but still trembling took hold of him in the angelic presence.
Dan 10:12
Then said he unto me, Fear not, Daniel; for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words. Both the LXX. and Theodotion insert Kepler before . This is the more remarkable as stands for “Jehovah” usually in the Greek versionsa title rarely occurring in Daniel in, and only in, the prayer of the preceding chapter. This addition does not occur in the Peshitta or Vulgate. He said unto me, Fear not, Daniel. Still the signs of terror were manifest in Daniel, and the angel spoke encouragingly to him. For from the first day, etc. When Daniel had begun his petition to God and his effort to understand God’s purpose concerning his people, then God had commissioned Gabriel. The whole process of humiliation, fasting, and prayer was allowed to go on to its completion before Gabriel came, in order to deepen in Daniel the desire for the hoped-for revelation, and thus enhance the joy of it when it came, and, perchance, also to justify to higher intelligences the giving of this special communication (comp. Dan 9:20) as to the answer being ready even while the petition was being put up. And I am come for thy words. Professor Fuller sees in this an additional tenderness. Zckler sees in it that in the Divine counsel Gabriel was commissioned, but was hindered for reasons assigned in the next verse.
Dan 10:13
But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days; but, lo, Michael, one of the ohief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia. The rendering of the LXX. is, “And the general () of the King of the Persians withstood me one and twenty days, and behold Michael, one of the first princes, came to help me, and I left him there with the general of the King of the Persians.” The sense of Theedotion is nearly the same as the LXX; only he has instead of . Like the LXX; Thee-dotion declares that Michael was left with the Prince of Persia. The Peshitta agrees more with the Massoretic, but, like the LXX. and Theedotion, it is with the “Prince” of Persia that there is some one remaining. The Peshitta here, in opposition to the Greek versions, has the statement that Gabriel remained, not Michael. The Vulgate agrees still further with the Massoretic, only instead of the plural “kings,” it has “king.” The most important differences are in the last clause, where the LXX. and Theodotion must have had the hiphil of where the Massoretic has the niphal. Gratz adopts this reading, which certainly has the advantage of making sense of an otherwise unintelligible passage. Professor Bevan, in his easy way, suggests this to be probably a mere guess, the insertion of , and the substitution of a transitive for an intransitive verb are quite in the manner of the LXX. translators. He forgets that Theodotion also has this variation, and also that, without any justification from the versions, he himself has suggested various readings. He does not observe that this interpretation affords a reason for Gabriel’s presence with Daniel. Michael relieved him in his opposition to the Prince of Persia. The other variant, “prince” instead of “king,” has the support of all the versions. But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days. That is to say, during the whole of Daniel’s fast. The angelology of later Judaism is a very complicated, not to say confused, subject. The angelology of one age is not that of another; and the angelology of the Jews in one country is not that of the Jews in another. The Jews themselves understood that the Babylonian captivity did a great deal to develop the doctrine of the angels; the Jewish tradition was that they brought back from Babylon the names of the angels. Not only had their residence in Babylon defined the Jewish ideas as to the names f the angels, they began to have clearer ideas of their functions. They reached the idea that every race had its guardian angel. This view is expressed in Deu 32:8, according to the Septuagint, “He set bounds for the nations according to the number of the angels of God.” To a similar purport is Ecclus. 17:17, “To each of the nations he appointed a leader, and Israel is the portion of the Lord.” There seems, however, a preparation for this in Isa 24:21 (comp. also Psa 29:1; Psa 106:9). As independent of revelation there is a strong inherent probability that there are races of beings of intelligence and might vastly superior to man, there is nothing inherently improbable in these intelligences being employed by the Almighty in furthering his providential scheme. Men are instruments of God; is it not at least not improbable that, if there are angels, they, too, co-operate with God in the working out of his great purpose? That every nation should have an angelic prince over it is not more extraordinary than that every Church should have a special angel over it (Rev 1:20; Rev 2:2, etc.). That there should be conflicts between these angelic princes is simply to say they are finite. Hitzig’s reference to Rev 12:7 is not to the point, for there is no indication of warlike opposition here. By the indications here, we might judge that the opposition of the Prince of Persia was to the coming of Gabriel to reveal to Daniel the purpose of God. We know nothing of the means employed in the opposition, or of the reason of it. Keil and Kliefoth have the idea that Gabriel was striving to influence the King of Persia, but was hindered in his efforts by the “Prince of Persia;” this is scarcely berne out by the context. But, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me. Michael (“Who is like God?”) is, in the twenty-first verse, declared to be the “prince” of the Jewish people, therefore equivalent to “the captain of the host of the Lord” (Jos 5:14). He is referred to in Rev 12:7 and Jud Rev 1:9. Where he is called one of “the chief princes,” there is reference to an angelic hierarchy, whether the same as that we find developed in the Book of Enoch or not cannot be decided certainly. In the Book of Tobit 12:15 Raphael declares himself “one of the seven holy angels who present the prayers of the saints, and who go in and out before the glory of the Holy One.” The Book of Tobit seems to have been written about b.c. 400; hence this is an indication of opinion before the Books of Enoch. In the Enoch books not only are the great angels mentioned, but their names arc given, and functions are assigned to them; but they are numbered as four, not seven. Enoch is posterior to Tobit, and finds a place for Michael, Raphael, and Gabriel. We have no means of testing whether the number of the chief angelic princes, of whom Michael was one, was four or seven, according to the opinion of Daniel. From the fact that Enoch is, so to speak, in the direct line of apocalyptic descent from Daniel, and Tobit is not, and, moreover, as the angelology of Tobit is in close connection with the Persian hierarchy of amhaspentas, of which there were seven,we may regard four as the more genuinely Jewish number. The later Jewish angelology has many Persian elements, as shown by Dr. Kohut, in his ‘Angelologie und Demonologie.’ Whether the number of the archangels be made four or seven, both Gabriel and Michael are of the number, whereas Gabriel’s words would rather indicate that, though Michael belonged to the rank of chief prince, he did not. As we cannot tell the nature of the opposition, we cannot tell the nature of the help afforded. And I remained there with the kings of Persia. It is very difficult to interpret this if we retain the Massoretic reading. In the first place, the sense given to nothartee in the Authorized and Revised is unsuitable. The angel is explaining how, after having delayed three whole weeks, he has now come. The sentence, as interpreted above,would have explained why he could not come at all to Daniel. It is attempted to get over this by explaining that Gabriel had beaten off the “Prince” of Persia, and that Michael remained with the King of Persia instead of him. This view, however, contradicts the function assigned to angels of nations, and implies a quasi-omnipresence on the part of Gabriel, and would render his explanation no explanation. The explanation of Gesenius, Havernick, and yon Lengerke, that nothartee is to be taken as meaning “I received the pre-eminence,” as Wirier, “superior discessi apud reges Persarum,” has no justification in usage. Gescnius would bring in the Syriac use of the hithpael of this verb, but though both Castell and Brockehuann assign meanings suitable, none of their quotations represents a sense precisely similar to that assigned to the verb here Hitzig’s interpretation, “I was delayed,” fails to explain his coming. Ewald’s explanation, “I was superfluous,” is logical, but has no grammatical justification. Professor Bevan’s explanation, which would take this last clause as parenthetical, is untenable, as it supplies no redden for the presence of Gabriel with Daniel. We must follow the LXX. and Theodotion in reading, either as Meinhold and Behrmann, or better, as Gratz, , as the vav in the former ease would naturally be read conversively. Besides, Gratz’s reading explains the needlessly emphatic . Further, it seems needful to accept the reading of the two Greek versions and the Peshitta, and instead of read . None of the old versions support the Massoretic; the Vulgate is the nearest; and all of them have either read or regarded as a form of the construct state, and so vocalized differently. Further, the later context here implies the contiuance of the conflict or controversy (verses 20, 21). We must understand, then, that Gabriel left Michael to maintain the conflict against the angelic “Prince” of Persia, while he came in obedience to Daniel’s prayer. We can have but little idea of what is meant by this conflict in the heavenlies between angelic beings.
Dan 10:14
Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision is for many days. None of the versions call for remark. The Peshitta inserts lesooph, “at the end,” before “days.” The Massoretic Hebrew has a peculiarity unsupported by the curlier versions: it has “for the days.” Of course, these versions may simply have neglected the article, as have our English versions, Authorized and Revised. In the latter drays. Kranichfeld holds that this refers to the tatter portion of the vision in Dan 8:1-27; not at the end of time. For yet the vision is for many days. Professor Bevan would translate, “since there is yet a vision for the days,” i.e. for the days already referred to in the eighth chapter. This would make both clauses have practically the same meaning, which this logical connection implies. There seems no need to take the “end of days,” as the end of the world.
Dan 10:15
And when he had spoken such words unto me, I set my face toward the ground, and I became dumb. The versions agree with the above. I set my face toward the ground does not mean that Daniel again fell prostrate, but that his eyes naturally sought the ground. And I became dumb. Not to be regarded as equivalent to “I remained silent,” though there is nothing in the narrative to indicate that Daniel had been speaking; he may have had the sensation of paralyzed vocal cords. Certainly the verb ‘alam means “to be dumb,” although, as with ourselves, this phrase dots not mean always physiological dumbness, but simply a silence which, from shyness or fear, one is unable to break. This is the meaning the versions attach to it. The opinion we indicate finds support in the dumbness of Zacharias, the father of John Baptist, after Gabriel appeared to him, and, still more, in what is related in the following verse.
Dan 10:16
And, behold, one like the similitude of the sons of men touched my lips: then I opened my mouth, and spake, and said unto him that stood before me, O my lord, by the vision my sorrows are turned upon me, and I have retained no strength. The LXX. rendering differs from this, “And behold, as the likeness of the hand of a man”due, more likely to explanatory paraphrase than to various reading of for ; still the phrase, “a likeness of sons of man,” is somewhat violent, and not to be paralleled by Psa 45:3“touched my lips, and I opened my mouth, and spake, and I said to him who stood before me, Lord, even when the vision was turned upon my side to me.” Clearly (tzeedee) has been read by mistake for (tzeeree). The sense of the Massoretic is difficult; but this is nonsense. “And there was no strength in me,” reading instead of . Theodotion renders, “And behold, as the likeness of a son of man touched my lips, and I opened my mouth, and spake, and said to him that stood before me, In thy appearance my bowels ( ) were turned in me, and I had no strength.” Theodotion has evidently had the singular instead of , or perhaps regarded it as a survival of the old form of the construct. It is probably not due to a different reading, but to a different meaning given to , that we have . The Peshitta resembles Theodotion very closely, having, however, enosh, “man,” instead of “son of man.” We have also go’, “body,” or “viscera,” as the translation of tzeereem. The Vulgate renders to the same purport; the last portion of the verse runs thus: In visions tua dissolutas sunt compages meae et nihil in me remansit virium. It also has, in the first clause, similitudo filii hominis. It seems difficult to avoid the conclusion that we should read “son of man” instead of “sons of man” Were there any diplomatic or other evidence in favour of the reading of the LXX; it would be much preferable to any other, as we have the description of the visitant whose hand touched Daniel, in verses 5 and 6. Hence the assertion here, that the likeness of a son of man touched him, does not harmonize with this, as it seems to introduce a new person. There is no reference to hands in the description in verses 5 and 6, “the hand as of a man” there would not be the introduction of something already mentioned. Touched my lips. In the previous chapter, verse 21, the angel Gabriel “touches” Daniel. The emphasis of the act, in the present instance, does not be in the fact of touching, but in thisthat it was the lips that were touched. In Isa 6:6 and Isa 6:7 one of the seraphim touches the lips of the prophet with “a live coal from off the altar.” In Isaiah the object is purification; in the case before us it is the restoration of the power of speech. Then I opened my mouth, and spake, and said unto him that stood before me. This is the result of the touch of the angelic hand. O my lord, by the vision my sorrows are turned upon me, and I have retained no strength. “Lord” here is not “Jehovah,” but “Adonai”a title of respect, certainly, but not necessarily of adoration. Theodotion and the Vulgate render “thy vision,” understanding by that “thy appearance.” The meaning is the same as that of the ordinary reading. Hence it is probably due to a desire to emphasize this rather than to any difference of reading. “My sorrows are turned upon me.” This is a term that involves great difficulty. The term is used of the pangs of childbirth (1Sa 4:19), and transferred to sorrows (Isa 13:8). And this is the sense in which it has generally been taken here; the more readily that in 1Sa 4:19 the same phrase is used as here But the sense does not seem very good; the appearance of the angel was not an occasion of sorrow, however much of awe there might be in it. The word has a number of meanings, which it is certainly difficult to bring into relationship with each other. Thus in Pro 26:14 it means a “hinge;” in Pro 25:13 it means “messenger,” and this is the meaning it most frequently bears (Pro 13:17; Isa 18:2; Jer 49:14; Oba 1:1). Neither of these meanings is at all suitable. In Psa 49:16 we have the word appearing in the K’thib, and translated “beauty;” hence it would be equivalent to (hodee) of Psa 49:8. The LXX. is out of court. Theodotion, the Peshitta, and the Vulgate differ from each other, so that nothing is to be drawn from them. We would, then, take this phrase as equivalent to that in the eighth verse, “I have retained no strength.” This fitly follows up what has been already stated.
Dan 10:17
For how can the servant of this my lord talk with this my lord? for as for me, straightway there remained no strength in me, neither is there breath left in me. The LXX. does not preserve the peculiar use of the demonstrative which we have here. Theodotion has it in the second case only; the Peshitta retains it; but the Vulgate omits it altogether. The rendering of neshama by in the Greek versions may be noted. Jerome renders, halitus. The Aramaic influence is seen in . (hayeh) instead of (‘ayeh). “How can the servant,” etc; exhibits respect and humility. For as for me, etc. This seems not to be part of Daniel’s address to the angel, but a note which he has added to indicate his condition while he was speaking. Neither is there breath left in me. There is no certainty whether this is to be taken in the physical or metaphysical sense; whether we should regard the prophet as declaring that awe deprived him of the power of breath, or he felt his consciousness so numbed as that he seemed to be without it.
Dan 10:18
Then there came again and touched me one like the appearance of a man, and he strengthened me. The versions here call for no remark. The prophet still stood, but trembling and powerless, unable to comprehend fully the revelation; but now again the strengthening hand touches him. It cannot be regarded as a strain put upon the meaning here, if we see in this repeated presence of one in the form of man a symbol of Christ, who took upon him the form of a servant, and was found in fashion as a man.
Dan 10:19
And said, O man greatly beloved, fear not; peace be unto thee, be strong, yea, be strong. And when he had spoken unto me, I was strengthened, and said, Let my lord speak; for thou hast strengthened me. The LXX. has its ordinary translation of the phrase rendered, “man greatly beloved ( ).” They give three words for the repetition of the command, “be strong:” , “be in good health;” , “play the man;” , “be strong.” In the last clause the third person is retained, “Let my lord speak, for he strengthened me”a change made for symmetry. Theodotion is much closer to the Massoretic text, only he, too, varies the words in the command, and has . The Peshitta, like Theodotion, varies the word in the command, In the last clause the verb is put in the passive, “and I was strengthened,” For the command the Vulgate has, confortare et esto robustus; but the last clause is in strict agreement with the Massoretic. It is to be noted that the repetition of the imperative, united by ray, is unexampled; the various renderings in the versions point to this being felt a difficulty, but do not suggest any variations of reading. Not only is the strengthening touch given, but consoling words are added, “Be strong, yea, be strong.” Daniel was called upon to put forth energy, to summon his forces mental and spiritual. He had received the strengthening touch, but his own volition must go along with the aid divinely afforded. It is the combination which we find in our Lord’s life; without faith even the miraculous power of our Lord could not be put forth. As we have noted, there is some uncertainty as to the reading, but no change would alter the sense of the passage, “And when he had spoken unto me, I was strengthened.” The words spoken called forth the power that was latent, and had been imparted to Daniel. And said, Let my lord speak, for thou hast strengthened me. Even to hold converse with angelic beings, entailed expenditure of vital energy. The overpowering sense of the spiritual has to be resisted, at least so far, in order that mental action may go on. Had strength not been imparted, the revelations bestowed would not have produced any permanent impression on the mind.
Dan 10:20
Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the Prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the Prince of Grecia shall come. The versions here are in close agreement with the Massoretic text. Theodetion, since he begins the speech of the angel with , may have read (hayn), “if,” instead of (ha), the sign of interrogation. The Peshitta has, “to make war,” instead of “fight,” indicating a beginning of hostilities, not a continuance of them. Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? This question appears to be abruptly put, and to be put without awaiting an answer. Probably the meaning would be better brought out by rendering, somewhat colloquially, “You know, don’t you? After I have revealed the future to you, I must return.” In considering this whole subject, we must beware of taking everything literally. We may not deduce, because of the statement here, that angels are under the limitations of time and space, or that there is actual warfare. We must regard the matter as, to a large extent, figurative. And now will I return to fight with the Prince of Persia. Every one who studies history in a philosophic spirit must see that the progress of the race, the evolution of that ultimate ideal statethe kingdom of heaven among menis accomplished by successive steps, and over each step a nationality presides. This nationality represents the special moment of spiritual force necessary to secure the new step the race is required to take. While in the lower plane of history the nations themselves do these things; in the higher sphere it is their angels who are the actors. A nation has in it much of the characteristics of a living organism, and the angel of the nation is the life of that organism. As a finite being, the angel of any nation of necessity is imperfect; his knowledge of the Divine plan only limited. His instrumentthe nation committed to his chargeis yet more imperfect. Let an imperfect being, however holy, have a piece of work to do, that work must assume, to him, an exaggerated importance; let him be associated as patron with sentient beings, and his affections must go forth to these beings in a special way. He will resist any attempt to limit in any way the function of that race which is specially his, and will be apt to interpret too widely this function, and be loth to recognize that its time is past, or this or that region is beyond its province. If we regard Gabriel as an angelnot of Egypt, as Hitzig, but of the kingdom of heaven, and by this the angel of prophecy (Ewald)then he must exercise a watchful care over the actions of each nationality, and therefore of its angel, lest the ultimate purpose of God be in any way hindered. The angel of Persia might regard the national semi-independence allowed to the Jews as hindering the evolution of the idea exhibited by the Persian race. The Persian rule allowed races a good deal of licence if tribute were paid. It was required to specialize its treatment of the Jews; to convey them back from Babylon to Palestine; to protect them in Palestine; to assist them to set up a quasi-independence. All this was contrary to the negative character of the Persian rule, in contradiction to its spirit, and therefore opposed by its angel, who represented this spirit. Michael, the special angel of the Jews, naturally came to assist Gabriel. What a conflict between angelic spirits may mean, what may be the weapons of their warfare, we know not; we do know that, though not carnal, they are mighty. And when I am gone forth. To this phrase several meanings have been attached. Havernick, Maurer, and Ewald take it as meaning “going forth to war.” Ewald renders, “I will return to contend against the Prince of Persia; so, while I am going forth, the Prince of Javan will come.” In this connection it is very doubtful whether (yatza’) can mean “going forth to battle.” Motion to the field of battle is indicated by “return.” Yatza’ simply means to go from a given place; the purpose may be indicated by some other word. Another view is that of Hitzig, Hofmann, and Bertheau, “to go out,” not to, but from “a conflict.” This meaning is possible; it would certainly need some determinant to fix this meaning on it, but this may be supplied from the preceding clause. This view, though suiting admirably with the otherwise untenable supposition that the “prince” speaking with Daniel is the angel of Egypt, does not suit with the view that Gabriel, the “prince” talking with Daniel, is the angel of prophecy, and therefore of the ideal kingdom. Keil would take the first meaning of yatza’, and would paraphrase thus, “Now shall I return to resume and continue the war with the Prince of Persia; but while I thus go forth to warwhile I continue the conflict, the prince of Javan shall come, and then there shall be a new conflict.” Yatza’ never does mean “to continue a conflict;” it means to begin either a war, a battle, or a campaign. A great deal of the difficulty is due to maintaining that angels are under the time-relation of human beings. The matter is clearer if we take it as meaning simply that when Gabriel went out from the presence of Daniel, the “Prince of Grecia” would come. Lo, the Prince of Grecia shall come. This does not refer to Alexander the Great, or the overthrow of the Persian Empire, still less to the Seleucids and their persecutions. Before his Babylonian reign, Cyrus encountered the Greeks, and roused their opposition. The angel, then, of the Greek nation began to stir up his people. Then came the Ionian revolt, and the successive invasions of Greece, which compelled the Persians to leave the “holy people” alone. The angelic Prince of Grecia appears first as an instrument of the angel of prophecy, to limit the power of Persia. When, after prolonged conflicts, the empire of Persia gives place to that of Greece, the conflict of the people of God must be renewed in a fiercer form.
Dan 10:21
But I will show thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince. The LXX. rendering is, “And in very truth () I will show thee the first things in the writing of truth: and there was no one helping with me against these, but Michael the angel.” The Septuagint translator read (hara’sheem), “the heads,” instead of (harashoom), written with a inserted as mater lectionis. Theodotion is in accordance with our English Version. The Peshitta renders, “Yet will I show thee something noted in the writing of truth; and there was none in all these who helped me but Michael your prince.” The Vulgate agrees with the Massoretic and the English. But I will show thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth. (‘abal) is a strongly adversative conjunction. The use of it is explained by Kranichfeld and Zckler as due to the fears for the theocracy aroused by the thought that the Greek power was rising against Israel. If the idea had been that Gabriel was called to hurry back to his post because of the threatened approach of the Prince of Grecia, then it might be defended; only even then either the fact of the necessity for speedy return to the Persian court would have been emphasized, or the fact that he is delaying to make known the contents of the writing of truth. It is, perhaps, better rendered by “nevertheless,” as it is in 2Ch 19:3. We can see the force of this particle by turning to 2Ch 19:7, “I Daniel alone saw the vision, for the men that were with me saw not the vision, but (equivalent to ‘nevertheless’) a great quaking fell upon them.” This clause, we see, then, has all the appearance of being intruded violently into the text; it interrupts the progress of thought, and does not suit the context. There is no indication that he, Gabriel, will have to hasten back to the court of Persia with such rapidity as would necessitate the introduction of (‘abal), “nevertheless.” But even so, why revert in the next clause to the contents of verse 20, without the slightest indication that the line of thought in the past clause was dropped as soon as taken up? The last clause of this verse reads much better in connection with verse 20 than with verse 21a. Behrmann transposes the clauses in this verse, so as to get over tiffs difficulty, and Professor M. Stuart puts the first clause in brackets. “The scripture of truth” is a phrase that might have been suggested by Psa 139:16, “In thy book were all my members written.” It is in line with a great number of phrases in apocalyptic literature; thus Enoch Psa 93:1, “And after that Enoch began to recount from the books;” the Book of Jubilees, 1:24; 4:31; 5:15, etc; “the tablets of the heavens.” The idea was that all the events that were to happen in the world’s history were record, d beforehand in the books or tablets of the heavens. It is from failing to notice this that the late Professor Fuller was led to say “the scripture of truth “is the title for the ensuing section. Against this view is the preposition “in;” it is in the scripture of truth, among other matters, that these things are noted which form the succeeding section. At the same time, the form the representation of the heavenly books, which note beforehand what was to happen, assumes here is simpler than that in Enoch or the Book of Jubilees. And there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince. As we have above said, this clause is closely connected with verse 20. In these things. This is rendered in the Revised Version “against these,” in accordance with the majority of recent commentators, Ewald, Hitzig, Fuller, Zckler, Bevan, Stuart, Kranlohfeld Keil, Kliefoth, Behrmann, etc; and, among older commentators, Jephet-ibn-Ali; but none of the older versions have it. The LXX. renders, ; Theodotion, ; the Peshitta has the preposition; the Vulgate renders, in his omnibus. With these Calvin agrees, though Luther renders, wider jene. Certainly, the most common meaning of in such a connection is “against.” So, notwithstanding the weight of the versions, we feel constrained to translate, “against these persons,” and not “in regard to these things.” In the first place, “in” is a far less frequent meaning of the preposition, and next, (aylayh), “these,” most naturally refers to the persons last named. Although “the Prince of Grecia” was to be the instrument of the overthrow of the power of Persia, it was to become oppressive afterwards, as had been revealed to Daniel in the vision of the ram and the he-goat. Gabriel, the angel of prophecy, the special guardian of God’s great ideal kingdom of heaven, was assisted in his guardianship only by Michael, the angelic Prince of Israel. The fact that along the line of the development of Israel as a nation ran, so far at least, the Divine plan concerning the kingdom of heaven, made it natural that Michael should favour that which furthered the interests of the race that was more specially under his care. As we have already said, we cannot even guess at the nature of these angelic conflicts.
HOMILETICS
Dan 10:2, Dan 10:8
Fasting.
The exercise of fasting seems to grow out of natural spiritual instincts, as it is found in nearly all religions, and is not forbidden but recognized and regulated in the teaching of Christ and his apostles (Luk 5:35; Act 13:2, Act 13:3; Act 14:23). It is, however, an exercise which is surrounded with erroneous ideas, and which needs to be cleared of them before it can be admitted as healthy and profitable. Let us notice
I. SOME ABUSES OF THE EXERCISE OF FASTING.
1. Ostentatious fasting. Such was the vulgar fasting of the Pharisees Ostentation in regard to an expression of deep spiritual feelings tends to destroy those very feelings. The study of “effect” and anxiety about the good opinion of men directly counteracts the influence of those emotions of spiritual grief and shame before God which fasting is supposed to express. Thus ostentatious lasting becomes hypocritical (Mat 6:16).
2. Formal fasting. Fasting which implies no real self-denial, though certain rules of abstinence are observed, is a mockery, and, if it is relied on for religions efficacy, a superstitious rite. It is then only a bodily exercise, and can have no spiritual force (1Ti 4:8).
3. Meritorious fasting.
(1) If we are to depend on God’s mercy, it is foolish to think that we can win this by any meritorious actions.
(2) Even if we could merit anything from God, it would be by useful service, not by merely putting ourselves to inconvenience. There is no merit in self-denial for its own sake. We cannot please God by simply displeasing ourselves. Any idea of the kind is a relic of the terror-worship of cruel deities.
4. Holiness in fasting. There is a foolish conceit with some people that fasting is more holy than natural living. But Christ teaches us that nature is holy and that joy is holy. Holiness does not imply abstinence, but purity and temperance.
II. THE RIGHT EXERCISE OF FASTING.
1. Involuntary fasting. Strong emotion destroys natural bodily appetite. Sorrow, especially, has this purely physical effect. Thus fasting is often a natural result of certain religious emotions. There is a sense of harmony which makes lawful worldily pleasures distasteful at a season of spiritual darkness. At such times fasting is exercised by instinct. Daniel was in sorrow; therefore he fasted.
2. Fasting to assist repentance. This is not undertaken to win merit with God, but simply for its effect on our own souls. The feeling of repentance is often too ephemeral. It is soon counteracted by the influx of other influences from the world without. Yet there are times when a man becomes convinced of some great sin. He may then find his compunction deepened and his repentance strengthened if for a season he abstains from lawful bodily comforts.
3. Fasting to assist spiritual thought. This cannot be enforced as a duty nor recommended for universal practice. But experience teaches that there are persons whose spiritual perceptions are quickened while their bodily nature is restrained. For all of us the full indulgence of appetiteeven when this does not lead to what is called excessdeadens the spiritual energies.
4. Mental fasting. It is sometimes well to abstain from active thinking, from the assertion of our own inclinations and reasonings, and to become passive recipients of truth, as it is borne in to the mind by the influences of nature and the active communings of the Divine Spirit (Zec 2:13).
Dan 10:18, Dan 10:19
Divine encouragement.
I. THE NEED OF ENCOURAGEMENT.
1. In trouble. It is difficult to work bravely and earnestly in the midst of calamity. The calamities of Israel were discouragements in the way of the service of God.
2. In guilt. Daniel had been confessing the sins of himself and his nation (Dan 9:5). Nothing is so depressing as the feeling of failure and the knowledge that it has come by our own fault.
3. In weakness. The burden of the mystery of life oppresses all who feel it, as it oppressed Daniel. Before the needs of the world and the tasks of life the strongest man may well feel weak in his own resources, and then his weakness may damp his zeal for service.
4. In fear. When the mystery of the future begins to unveil itself and future troubles appear to be drawing near, the vagueness with which they are seen magnifies the terror of them. The fear which is then roused paralyzes our energies.
II. THE SOURCES OF ENCOURAGEMENT.
1. They are found in God. God sends the angel to strengthen Daniel Until we know God, we dread his presence; but when we know him, the more we enter into his presence, the more peace and confidence shall we receive.
2. They spring from the love of God. Daniel is “greatly beloved.“ The assurance of God’s love is his greatest encouragement. If we know God loves us, we may be assured that he will ward off all real harm, and thus we may lose our fear in his love (1Jn 4:18).
3. They flow to us through channels of brotherly sympathy. “One like the appearance of a man” touched Daniel. God comes to us in “the Son of man,” and through the brotherly sympathy of Christ communicates his Divine encouragement.
4. They manifest themselves by practical results in communicating real strength. Daniel was strengthened. There is a real supply of spiritual strength which is bestowed by the gift of the Holy Spirit. The encouragement this gives is not only in idea, it is in fact. The weak man is encouraged by finding himself becoming strong in the strength of God (Isa 40:29; 2Co 12:10).
III. THE WAY TO OBTAIN DIVINE ENCOURAGEMENT.
1. By humility and contritions. Daniel had humbled himself and confessed sin, and thus was prepared for God’s help. We can only be filled with God’s strength when we are emptied of our own self-confidence.
2. By prayer. Daniel was a man of prayer (verse 12). God encourages us in proportion as we seek his help.
3. By faith As we trust God, he strengthens us, because his strength is spiritual and can only enter us as we voluntarily submit to his influence (Heb 11:33, Heb 11:34).
HOMILIES BY H.T. ROBJOHNS
Dan 10:1-12, Dan 10:14-19
The vision of the Christ.
“I was left alone, and saw this great vision” (Dan 10:8). It is well to begin by clearing up the context. We have now only one more prophecy in Daniel. This occupies the eleventh chapter. The tenth contains a prologue to the prophecy; the twelfth, an epilogue. In Dan 10:1 the character of the prophecy is indicated:
1. Its subject-matter is afflictive. “The conflict is great.“ It covers a time of great calamities (see the Hebrew).
2. The prophecy was to be unusually intelligible. “And he understood the word, and understanding was there to him in the vision.” Some haze of mystery there might be, but not the thick darkness which had enrobed preceding revelations.
3. It would certainly be true. “A word was revealed to Daniel and true the word.” The prophecy of Dan 11:1-45. is the most minute of Scripture; and hence men have been tempted to disbelieve in it as prophecy, and to regard it as prophecy written after the event, lien might have disregarded it before fulfilment; hence Daniel gives this assurance. We now here concern ourselves with Daniel‘s vision of the Christ.
I. THE SCENE OF THE VISION On the Tigris. The first migration to Jerusalem had taken place. Daniel’s advanced age made it, perhaps, impossible that he should have joined in it. He may have been on the Tigris:
1. Either on an embassage.
2. Or retired from all official life.
II. THE TIME OF THE VISION.
1. Two years after the first migration back from captivity (verse 1).
2. A time of sorrow. Mourning was usually for seven days: Daniel mourned for three times seven. Fasting, etc. Why? Realize the circumstances. The temple was indeed rising; but neighbouring peoples were exerting all their influence with the Persian king to frustrate the work. Therefore anxiety and fear. Daniel’s affliction would be in proportion as success seemed certain. Good men grieve over slow progress of the Divine kingdom, and the fierceness of the opposition.
3. Time of the Passover. On the twenty-fourth day of the first month came the vision. We infer that Daniel had consecrated the first three weeks of the new year to devotion. This included the Passover weeka time of unusual solemnitywhen he would be in earnest sympathy with his nation.
III. THE VISION. That this was none other than the vision of Christ the Lord appears:
1. From the after-developments of the scene.
2. From a comparison with the vision of Christ in the Apocalypse. (Rev 1:1-20.)
Compare the two descriptions of clothingthe girdle, the countenance, the eyes, the feet, the voice. Daniel adds, “His body also was like the beryl.” John adds, “His head and his hairs were white,” etc. In drawing out the description into detail, note: the clothing was of the finest, purestthe garb of priests, prophets, saints, and angels; the uncovered portions of the body shone with gemlike splendour; all the symbols suggest light-splendour; the girdle of fine gold; the arms and feet “like the eye of polished brass,” the part that catches the blaze of sunlight and throws it back; the face as lightning, and the eyes as fire; the voice majestic. All this may be spiritually expanded.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE VISION.
1. On the companions of the seer. (Verse 7.) Compare effect on Paul’s companions on the way to Damascus, of the vision of the same Christ.
2. On the seer. (Verses 8, 9.) He swooned; but the mighty voice came rolling into his ear, as the roar of ocean breaks into the caves upon the shore. Here we have a picture of the inability of man to stand before the unveiled revelations of God (comp. Rev 1:17).
V. THE RESTORING OF CHRIST THE LORD. Christ:
1. Sets man erect in the presence of Divine revelations. (Verse 11.) No need of cringing. We ourselves are made. in the image of God, and have affinity with the Divine.
2. He does so gradually. Daniel was first flat on his face; then on all fours; then half-raised and trembling; and finally stood upright on his feet. In this, see how man is gradually led up to all the light which God has to give. In heaven the unveiling may be gradual (verses 9, 10, 11).
3. Sympathetically. “Behold, a hand touched me” (verses 10, 16-19).
4. Assures man that his devout aspirations are recognized beyond the sky. Daniel’s was the attitude of a devout truth-seeker. He “had set his heart to understand,” and “to chasten himself before his God.” We should have more uniformity of Scripture interpretation, were the interpreter always of this spirit.
5. And of the sure answer to his prayers. (Verse 12.) As soon as prayer was offered, it was heard, and secret agencies were evoked for its answer; but there were many obstacles to be overcome. The later part of the chapter shows this. So may it ever be, before our prayers can be answered, long lines and combinations of secondary causes may have to he set in operation, and formidable hostilities subdued. Patience in waiting for, as well as faith in expecting, the answer, are both necessary in the matter of prayer.R.
Dan 10:13, 20-ch. 11:1
War in the realm supernatural.
“And now will I return to fight with the Prince of Persia” (Dan 11:20). In these verses we have opened out the fact that there is war in the realm supernatural. To understand them, it is absolutely necessary to revise the English version. We read thus: “And the prince of the kingdom of Persia stood against me twenty and one days, and behold Michael one of the chief princes came to help me, and I gained the superiority there by the side of the kings of Persia And he said, Dost thou know why I came unto thee? And now I will return to war with the Prince of Persia, and while I [thus] go forth [to war], behold the Prince of Javan will come. But yet I will show to thee that which is written in the book of truth. And not one is there showing himself strong with me against these [the princes of Persia and Javan] except Michael your prince; I also in the first year of Darius the Mode stood in order to strengthen and for a fortress to him” (i.e. Michael). This reading of ours is necessary to make clear the meaning of our homiletical culture. Lest any should be surprised at the fulness of the revelation in Daniel as to angels and the angel-world, we may observe that there are two epochs in Hebrew history, when angels are specially prominent.
1. The time of the judges. Destitute of direct revelation or prophetic guidance.
2. The period of the Captivity. One of special trial, incident to contact wit h heathenism.
I. THE ANTAGONISTS.
1. On the side of God.
(1) The Angel-God. The Loges. The “certain man” of verse 5. The Lord Jesus. The speaker throughout (verses 13, 20Dan 11:1).
(2) Michael. His name means, “Who is like unto God?” and implies that, however high is the scale of being, there is an infinite distance between him and God (see Dan 12:1; Jud Dan 1:7; Rev 12:7). The following propositions seem clear about him: He is not the Loges; for he is here distinguished from him. “One of the chief princes,” one of the principal in the hierarchy of heaven. “Your prince,” the angelic representative and guardian of the Jewish nation. “The great prince who standeth for the children of thy people.” An archangel.
2. On the side of the world. The “princes” here named are the supernatural power standing behind the daimoniae, who stood behind the national gods, and were represented by them. They are spirits of evil, inspiring the worldly anti-Divine action of the great empires of earth.
(1) The “Prince of Persia.”
(2) The Prince of Javan; i.e. Greece.
II. THE WAR. The war was on behalf of Israel, and may be described as being prosecuted through three supernatural campaigns. We consider them separately.
1. The first campaign. (Dan 11:1.)
(1) The antagonist. Not mentioned here by name, but, following the analogy of the rest of the description, is certainly the celestial “Prince” of Babylonia.
(2) The casus belli. The occasion of conflict. This, doubtless, was the necessity of placing on the Babylonian throne one who would be favourable to the return of Israel from the Captivity.
(3) Speciatlities.
(a) Michael carried on the war.
(b) The Christ supported him.
This order is reversed in the next campaign.
(4) The victory. Lies with the Divine in every case.
2. The second campaign. (Verse 15.)
(1) The antagonist. “The Prince of Persia.’
(2) The casus belli. The obstruction raised against the restoration of the temple, at the instigation of Israel’s enemies.
(3) Specialities.
(a) This campaign was carried on by the Angel-God himself.
(b) But aided by Michael. Here should be noted the doctrine that angels and men may be co-workers together with God.
(c) Was synchronous with Daniel‘s prayer. All the way through the twenty-one days the prayer was being answered through a mighty conflict carried on in a higher world.
(4) The victory. Specially mentioned: “And I gained the superiority there by the side of the kings of Persia.”
3. The third campaign. (Verses 20, 21.)
(1) The antagonists. The “princes” of Persia and Javan.
(2) The casus belli. All that, in their worldliness, was attempted by Persia afterwards, by Greece, by Alexander and his successors, especially Antiochus, to the sore detriment of the Jewish people.
(3) A speciality. Only Michael in this great contention was on the Christ-side. Note:
(a) There is, then, liberty in heaven as on earth to do or not to doto go forth to war or to rest in peace.
(b) Michael made a noble use of liberty.
(c) By endowment he towered above others “One of the chief princes.”
(d) Therefore to him were great responsibilities entrusted. He was made the guardian spirit of the Hebrew nation and Church. “To whom much is given” etc; seems to be a law of all moral worlds. “Michael your prince.“ “To a subordinate spirit God will not entrust a work demanding special power and greatness.”
(4) The victory. Again not expressly mentioned, but sure.
The following deductions from the whole subject should, perhaps, have special mention and emphasis:
1. The Church has many and powerful enemies.
2. It abides under most powerful protection. What Michael was to Israel of old, that, and more than that, is the Lord Jesus to Israel now; and he has many helpers.
3. Its destiny is in conflict in the worlds above, as well as here below.
4. In the holy war here, the humblest may take a share. The Son of God stooped to avail himself of the help of Michael; so he ever stoops to accept the humblest contribution, the lowliest service.
“The Son of God goes forth to war,
A kingly crown to gain;
His blood-red banner streams afar;
Who follows in his train?”
R.
HOMILIES BY J.D. DAVIES
Dan 10:1-10
Man’s foolish terror in the presence of a heavenly visitor.
In accepting the testimony of others, with respect to matters beyond the reach of our own senses and experience, we must be satisfied on three points.
(1) Is the subject-matter of the testimony opposed to reason?
(2) Was the witness himself deceived?
(3) Is the witness truthful? Now, on all these points the record of Daniel is thoroughly reliable.
The matter of this vision is most reasonable in itself. We have an accumulation of proof that Daniel was not deceived. It was not a subjective hallucination, but an objective reality. As evidence of Daniel’s thorough truthfulness, he places on record the minutest circumstances of time and place. If there had been any inaccuracy here it would have been detected in the age while Daniel’s contemporaries were yet alive. In many parts of the narrative we have the confirmations of secular historians; and best evidence of all have we that this was a real visit of an angel, viz. that his predictions of events have been verified in history.
I. THERE WAS PERSONAL PREPARATION TO RECEIVE THIS HEAVENLY VISION. The habit which Daniel formed in youth was of inestimable service to him in old age. Incidentally we may observe how self-consistent are the several parts of this prophetical book. The flesh has always been, more or less, hostile to the spirit. Daniel had wisely repressed and held in control his bodily appetites in the days of his youth; and by reason of this the finer feelings and loftier faculties of his soul had been gradually developed. The practice of abstinence and self-denial had become easy. Yet he did not abstain from food because the act possessed in itself any meritorious excellence. He abstained because his soul was so absorbed in nobler occupation that appetite had lost its edge and food its charm. We are not told the particular reason of this long mourning, yet we can easily infer that his grief was excited by the depressed condition of his people Israel. Self had long since been sacrificed on the altar of his God. He rejoiced in Israel’s joy; he mourned in Israel’s sorrow. Such tears clear the eye of the soul for the perception of heavenly things.
II. THE SUBSTANCE OF THE VISION. It was the vision of a celestial being, in the form and raiment of a man. To what extent this august person, as he appeared to Daniel, appeared in his native essence, or accommodated himself to human eyes, no living man can say. Whether the unfallen angels have any definite form apprehensible to human eyes, is a question more curious than important. But certain it is that in many vital respects men resemble angels. They have understanding of God’s works. They can appreciate truth. Both angels and regenerate men love righteousness and hate wickedness. Both are gifted with benevolence. Both have conscience, affection, choice, will. Here are ample grounds for intercourse and friendshipa joint occupation of heaven. In this resplendent vision we may see what ransomed man shall be. Precious stones, fire, electric flame, burnished brass,these are the emblems of our transfigured nature. Earthly dulness and deformity shall give place to the refinements of celestial splendour. What we call, in our ignorance, supernatural, is but Nature in her higher forms and essences. Whether communication of thought among the angels is by means of outward signssomething akin to wordswe cannot tell. On this occasion there was not only the form of a glorious man, there was also the language of a man and the sympathy of a man. To accommodate themselves to the necessities of men is a delight to angelic natures as it is to God.
III. THE STRANGE EFFECTS OF THIS VISION UPON MEN. One might have supposed that this visit of a heavenly stranger would be to Daniel, if not to his attendants, an occasion of unmixed delight. It was, without doubt, a special mark of God’s favour. When we wish to show a distinguishing mark of respect to a friend we send our messages, not by a menial servant, but by a person of distinction. And that God should have sent a special despatch to Danielnot a mere voice, not a human messenger, not an ordinary angelbut Gabriel himself, this ought to have been welcomed as a high mark of Divine kindness. To be assured that God has other orders of servants beside ourselves, this is a pleasure. To be assured that these nobler and more loyal natures regard us, not as dangerous rivals of their privileges, but as fellow-heirs of their home, this ought to be rich delight. On what ground, then, does this pious man shrink from contact with this glorious servant of Jehovah? We can conceive of no other ground than this, viz. the sense of personal sin. Notwithstanding Daniel’s penitence for sin, and his faith in God’s mercy, there yet remained the consciousness of great unworthiness. Hence a messenger from God may be an instrument to visit just recompense. Still, we must note that the effect o, Daniel was very different from the effect on his companions. At the sound of the angel’s overpowering voice the attendants on this aged statesman fled. Regardful chiefly of their own safety, they fled to hide themselves. Like the Gravelling companions of St. Paul, they heard a voice but saw no person. There is such a thing, even in our present life, as a refinement of the bodily sensesa development and quickening of the sensitive capacityto discern immaterial things. On the eve of the Saviour’s crucifixion the Father’s voice pierced the blue welkin. Bystanders, with dull and stolid souls, said that it thundered. Others, having a finer perception of things, caught an articulate sound, and averred that an angel spake. Yet One at least detected the very words, and recognized them as the response of the eternal God. Daniel’s senses were overpowered by the splendour of this distinguished visitor. Strength failed him. He was prostrate with awe, yet his mind was awake and active, so that he heard the words which this glorious spirit spake.
IV. THE PROOFS THAT THIS VISION HAD AN OBJECTIVE REALITY. The votaries of science make a demand for facts. Theologians respond to the demand, and supply them with facts in abundancefacts which cannot be gainsaid. Here was the fact that Daniel’s companions heard a voice so novel and so startling that they ran to hide themselvesa type this of what guilty men do in every age of the world. Here was the fact of which Daniel’s eye was witness, the fact to which Daniel’s ear testified, the fact to which Daniel’s sense of touch responded. Here is an accumulation of evidenceone faculty corroborated the testimony of another faculty. Here were facts attested by the organs of his body, and confirmed by all the powers of his mind. Here were facts which entered into the inmost experiences of the manclear answers to prayer, which satisfied his wish, and expanded his knowledge, and invigorated his hope. Here were facts predicted which, in due time, were verified in the actual history of the nations. If anything in history or in science is credible, this is certainthat Daniel’s vision was no subjective illusion, no hallucination of the brain, but an objective reality. He obtained positive information, which has served ever since for the instruction of mankind. He received from his distinguished visitor strengtha positive communication of blessing. Here are solid facts, which refuse to evaporate before the breath of honest inquiry.D.
Dan 10:11-21
Variety of angelic service.
It is quite legitimate for us to reason from God’s conduct towards men in the past to his probable conduct towards men now. If in his wisdom he employed his angels to be ministers of good to Daniel and to Israel two thousand years ago, we may conclude that it is an exercise of wisdom to do the like to-day. Perfect wisdom will only change its plans, so far as new circumstances and needs arise. Hence there is instruction and consolation for us in this Scripture.
I. ANGELS ARE EMPLOYED TO BRING TO MEN ASSURANCE OF THEIR ACCEPTANCE WITH GOD. This angel, who was probably Gabriel, was commissioned to assure Daniel that he was “greatly beloved.” Every doubt upon that head was completely removed. The angel knew what were God’s dispositions of mind towards Daniel, and he was empowered to convey the intelligence. There is nothing unreasonable in this; no improbability that beings of refined nature exist in nearer relation to God than do men; no improbability that they perform acts of service for men. That which is naturally probable is made certain by the written revelation. It is often the case that we cannot account for our moods of feeling, our hopefulness and our despondency, by any known events. Who shall say that these states of mind are not the result of angelic visitation? That we are not conscious of the presence of angels is no proof that they do not visit us. Their ethereal natures may be impervious to human sight, except by miraculous interposition. Elisha’s servant did not perceive the angelic host sent for their protection until God had specially opened his eyes. Once and again this angel assured Daniel of his interest in God’s love, charged him to dismiss his fears, and brought to him heavenly peace.
II. ANGELS ARE EMPLOYED TO INFORM THE HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. One main object of Gabriel’s visit to Daniel was to shed light upon passing events, and to enlarge Daniel’s comprehension of God’s government. So high was God’s esteem for Daniel, that Gabriel was despatched on purpose to dislodge ignorance and doubt from his mind. He assures him that the want of visible answer to prayer is no proof that God has not heard, nor that he is unwilling to reply. On the contrary, Daniel’s prayer had taken effect from the very beginning, and measures were at once set in motion in accordance therewith. The prayers and lastings of good men are links (ordained by God) in the chain of causes and effects. As soon as man interceded for Israel, Gabriel was despatched on business of high importance to the kingdom of Persia. And Gabriel was further charged to unfold to Daniel what was in the volume of God’s purposesthe series of vicissitudes through which Israel would be destined to pass. God’s thoughts were loftier than Daniel’s; his designs had a wider scope and range than his servant’s. Nothing short of the establishment of permanent righteousness will satisfy God.
III. ANGELS ARE EMPLOYED TO INCREASE OUR STRENGTH. It is noteworthy that as Daniel’s needs arose one after the other, the angel was prepared to meet each one. Daniel was prostrate; the angel set him upright. Daniel was so stunned with the intelligence, that he was dumb; the angel opened his mouth, and gave him speech. Daniel fainted under a sense of awe and wonder; the angel imparted new strength with his touch. We are impressed with the considerateness, the tenderness, the thoughtful sympathy, of this angelic visitor. There was strength imparted to his physical nature by a touch; there was strength imparted to his soul by the angel’s words. According to the constitution of man’s nature is the agency employed by God. The angel who strengthened Christ Jesus in the garden of suffering can also strengthen us.
IV. ANGELS ARE ENGAGED TO PROTECT THE INTERESTS OF THE CHURCH IN PALACES AND IN COUNCILS OF STATE. There are times when they can best serve us, not at our side, but at a distance from us. Probably Daniel was agitated in soul, because for three weeks no sign of answer came from heaven. Yet, all the while, answer had come, though he was unconscious of it. Daniel was concerned, not for himself, but for the well-being and fortunes of Israel. But he might rest assured that God had more at heart these intereststhan man, however zealous, ever can. This report of Gabriel opens to our minds a new view of angelic ministration. It is evident that they do perform their service on earth, for the most part, unseen by human eyes. Gabriel had been with the kings and statesmen of Persia. So important to Israel’s well-being was his presence in that court, that for three weeks he had remained there. His power was limited; he could not be in two places at once, nor could he accomplish his mission without the assistance of Michael. For the time being, it was better that Daniel should remain in ignorance of the fact. His continued fasting and prayer were essential to complete success. In what fashion Gabriel rendered service we are not told. Most probably he had power to influence the views, the motives, the ambitious of men. A thousand subtle agencies were at his command, by which he could direct the counsels of men and bring about the purposes of God. Angelic influence, then, is a factor in state concerns which we do well not to ignore.
V. ANGELS HAVE OFTEN TO CONTEND WITH EVIL SPIRITS IN FULFILLING THE BEHESTS OF GOD. There can be little doubt that the language here employed by Gabriel, viz. “the prince of the kingdom of Persia,” refers to one of the leading spirits of darkness, one of the fallen angels. There are principalities and powers in hell. Satan is termed the “prince of this world,” “the prince of the power of the air.” An antagonist of Gabriel would be fittingly an evil spirit. Gabriel speaks of fighting with him. There was hot warfare. So we read in the Epistle of Jude that Michael disputed with the devil about the body of Moses. That some bold and crafty spirit, in the confederate host of hell, should be told off to do some particular evil work is probable enough; and that such, having subordinates under him, should be styled leader or prince of a particular earthly empire is equally probable. This earth, then, is the scene of mighty conflicts. Angels here have their combats as well as men. Here, perhaps, is being fought out the crucial conflict between the Creator and his rebellious creaturesthe conflict between righteousness and wickedness. Gabriel, though “excelling in power,” is not omnipotent. Some things even an angel alone cannot do. They learn that in union is strength. Michael is sent to help himMichael, who is set apart as the prince or protector of Israel. Gabriel cannot be long spared from the particular scene of conflict. During a temporary truce he visits Daniel This accomplished, he returns to the troublous scene in the court of Persia.D.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Dan 10:1. In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia That is, after the death of Darius, or the seventy-second year from the commencement of the captivity, the two hundred and fourteenth of the aera of Nabonassar, and the fifth of his reign, according to the canon: then, as follows in one manuscript, debar Jehovah, “the word of JEHOVAH was revealed.” By this time the prophet must have been at least ninety years of age, and persons have often been favoured with stronger and farther illuminations a little before their deaths, as was the case of Isaac and Jacob, in the book of Genesis. The kingdom of Elam, from the son of Shem of that name, was considerable among the nations in the time of Abraham, under Chedorlaomer, Gen 14:4-5 and seems to have continued increasing and flourishing afterwards till it was subdued by the united powers of Media and Babylon. By an union with the Medes it recovered this defeat, so as to become the seat of extensive or universal empire under the name of Peres or Persia, in the first year of Cyrus.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
4. The prophets last vision, containing the most thorough description of the future sufferings of Israel, and of its ultimate Messianic exaltation.
Chapters 1012.
a. The appearance of the angel on the banks of the Tigris, as preparatory to the subsequent prophecies and introductory to them.
Dan 10:1 to Dan 11:1.
1In the third year of [to] Cyrus king of Persia, a thing [word] was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing [word] was true [truth], but [and] the time appointed [warfare] was long [great]: and he understood the thing [word], and had understanding of [in] the vision [appearance.]
2In those days I Daniel was1 mourning three full weeks.2 I ate no pleasant 3 bread, neither came flesh nor wine in [to] my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all till three whole weeks were fulfilled.
4 And in the four and twentieth day of [to] the first month, as [and] I was by 5 [upon] the side of the great river, which [it] is Hiddekel, then [and] I lifted up mine eyes, and looked [saw], and, behold, a certain [one] man clothed in 5 linen [linens], whose [and his] loins were girded with fine gold of Uphaz; his body also [and his body] was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour to [the aspect of] polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude. 7And I Daniel alone saw the vision [appearance]; for [and] the men that were with me saw not the vision [appearance]; but a great quaking fell upon them, so that [and] they fled to hide [in hiding] themselves.
8Therefore [And] I was left alone, and saw this great vision [appearance], and there remained no strength in me; for my comeliness was turned in [upon] me 9 into corruption, and I retained no strength. Yet [And] heard I the voice of his words: and when [as] I heard the voice of his words, then [and] was I in a deep 10 sleep [stupified] on my face, and my face toward the ground [earth]. And, behold, a hand touched me, which [and] set me upon my knees and upon the palms of my hands. 11And he said unto me, O Daniel, a man greatly beloved, understand [have understanding in] the words that I speak unto thee, and stand upright: for unto thee am I now sent. And when he had spoken [at his speaking] this word unto [with] me, I stood trembling.
12 Then [And] said he unto me, Fear not, Daniel; for from the first day that thou didst set [give] thy heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy 13 God, thy words were heard, and I am [have] come for [at] thy words. But [And] the prince of the kindom of Persia withstood [was standing in front of] me one and twenty days: but [and], lo, Michael, one of the chief [first] princes, came 14 to help me; and I remained there with [beside] the kings of Persia. Now [And] I am [have] come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter [sequel of the] days: for yet the vision is for many days.
15And when he had spoken [in his speaking] such like [like these] words unto [with] me, I set [gave] my face toward the ground [earth], and I became dumb. 16 And, behold, one like the similitude of the sons of men [man] touched [touching upon] my lips: then [and] I opened my mouth and spake, and said unto him that stood before me, O my lord, by the vision [appearance] my sorrows 17 are turned upon me, and I have retained no strength. For [And] how can the servant of this my lord talk [speak] with this my lord? for [and] as for me [I], straightway there remained [would stand], no strength in me, neither is there breath left in me.
18Then [And] there came again and touched me one like the appearance of a man, and he strengthened me, 19and said, O man greatly beloved, fear not; peace be unto thee; be strong, yea [and], be strong. And when he had spoken unto [in his speaking with] me, I was strengthened, and said, Let my lord speak; for thou hast strengthened me.
20Then [And] said he, Knowest thou wherefore I [have] come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, 21 [then lo, the prince of Grcia shall [has] come. But I will show [tell] thee that which is noted [recorded] in the scripture of truth: and there is none that 1 holdeth with me in [upon] these things, but Michael your prince. Also [And] I, in the first year of [to] Darius the Mede, even I, stood to confirm and to strengthen him.
PREFATORY REMARKS
Concerning the final vision of Daniel (chap. 1012) as a whole
The last section of the prophetically visional part of this book falls into three clearly defined subdivisions of unequal length, and was therefore not inappropriately treated by the person who divided the Holy Scriptures into chapters. It is not only the most comprehensive, but, because of its form and contents, also the most remarkable and difficult among the prophetic portions of the book. Having been composed later than the three preceding visions, namely subsequent to the captivity and when the return of the exiles had already begun (see on Dan 10:1), it supplements their contents, and develops them still fartherespecially those of the second vision (chap. 8) and of the third (chap. 9). The development of the fourth and last world-power to the stage of anti-Christianity, which was described with special interest in those two chapters, is now illustrated more fully than in any former instance, and at the same time, the ultimate triumph of the kingdom of God over that and all other opposing powers is brought into a clearer light and portrayed in more glowing colors than heretofore. The relation of the section to chap. 7 as serving to complement and still farther develop its subject, becomes especially prominent in this bright closing scene; while the prophecy is in so far complementary to chapters 8 and 9 as it describes the development of the anti-Ohristian world-power in predictions distinguished by a greater fulness of detailto say nothing of the similarity between its preparatory scenery and that of chap. 8 and also of Dan 9:20-23. The section serves to complete the visions of chap. 8 by describing more exactly the hostile relations in which the various constituent sections of the fourth world-power stood to each other, as already symbolically indicated in Dan 8:22 et seq.; and particularly by showing how the holy land, which lay between the contending sections of the divided empire, in some cases was drawn indirectly into suffering, and in others was made the object of direct attack. In like manner this vision becomes complementary to that in chap. 9 since it fills the outline of the sixty-two weeks and also of the one final week of tribulation [?], which were but briefly referred to in that chapter, with a wealth of contents, that displays a growing animation and interest as the description draws near to the close of the sixty-second and the beginning of the last week. In tracing the particular manner of the development of the anti-Christian power out of the fourth and last world-monarchy, there seems to have been the occasional intervention of a later hand, which drew the prophecy with sharper lines and adapted it more fully to the subsequent facts connected with its historical fulfilment, than had been done in the general outline which was revealed to the prophet.3 The statements in Dan 10:5 et seq., concerning the geographical position of the two most powerful sections of the great divided Javanic world-empire, and also concerning the direction taken by the various expeditions for conquest which their rulers organized, the repeated attempts to unite the contending dynasties by means of matrimonial alliances, the insurrections and treasonable plots against individual sovereigns, etc., can hardly be regarded otherwise than as interpolations on the part of a pious Jewish apocalyptist of the Maccaban age, although it may be impossible at this day to venture a definite estimate respecting the proportion of the whole section Dan 11:5-45 that originated with Daniel, or as to how much is to be credited to the subsequent reviser (see the exeget. remarks on the several passages, particularly on Dan 10:5-6; Dan 10:8; Dan 10:14; Dan 10:17-18, 25, 27, etc., and pre-eminently on Dan 10:40 et seq.; and cf. supra, Introd. 1, note 2, and 4). While, for reasons that have been given (cf. Introd. 4, note 1), we decidedly reject the hypothesis that the entire section Dan 10:1 to Dan 12:13, excepting only the first four verses of chap. 12, is spurious, we regard the theory that chap. 11 has been interpolated as above suggested, as necessary, chiefly because details characterized by such unusual precision as is found in that chapter, seem to conflict with the nature of genuine and healthful prophecy, and with the analogy of all the remaining prophecies in the history of Old-Test. Revelation 4 We are entirely agreed with Kranichfeld (p. 340 et seq.) in holding that the nature or the self-evident canon of prophecy requires that the prediction should not usurp the place of historical development itself, i.e., that it should not adduce such future dates, as cannot be connected with the time of the prophetic originator, as the unfolding of a religious or moral idea animated by the operations of Godalthough in other respects a particularizing description may offer any amount of detailed representations in illustration, limited only by the confines established by that canon. We cannot, however, agree with him in believing that the entire vision before us, and especially that part contained in chap. 11, must be regarded by that canon simply as a developing of the ideas contained elsewhere in the book. The many surprising details of that chapter do not appear to an unbiassed mind as the mere development of former thoughts, but rather as concrete statements respecting the political and family history of the Seleucid and the Ptolemies, such as no other Old-Test. prophet would have attempted to furnish, even approximately, and such as conflict with the spirit of Old-Test. prophecy in general. We are certainly not compelled by any merely subjective reason to assume an interpolation of the text of Daniel in this place, after having rejected that theory in every other instance. The only reason which prevents us from defending the genuineness of this closing section is based on the analogy of all the balance of O.-T. prophecy, which in no case affords a similar example of specific and detailed description of the future (cf. Tholuck, Die Propheten und ihre Weissagungen, p. 105 et seq.; Die Grenzen einer Prdiktionan investigation, however, which seems to require a more strict apprehension).
The whole section divides itself, as has already been observed, into three parts, the first of which describes the general circumstances that conditioned the new vision, and also the introductory features of the vision itself (consisting in the appearance of a mighty angel, which at first excited the prophets alarm and terror, but subsequently exercised a comforting and exalting influence over him), Dan 10:1 to Dan 11:1. The special description of the future having been thus introduced is taken up by the second part and carried forward from the unfolding of the Persian world-empire, then upon the stage, to the highest point of conceited power developed by the antitheistic tyrant who ultimately sprang from the Javanic world-monarchy, and who became the antichrist of the Old Testament (Dan 11:2-45).5 Finally, the third part describes the triumph, the deliverance, and the exaltation of Gods people in the Messianic period, and, if it does not certify the nearness of that ra of ultimate prosperity, it yet conveys the assurance that its approach is determined by immutable measurements and conditions fixed by God (Dan 12:1-13).The exorbitant length of the intermediate part, exceeding, as it does, the aggregate of the others nearly two-fold, might be adduced as an additional and highly probable evidence of its interpolation, as suggested above.6
EXEGETICAL REMARKS
Dan 10:1. The time and significance of the vision. In the third year of Cyrus king of Persiatherefore B. C. 536 or 535 [probably, 534], later than any other date in the book (cf. on Dan 1:21). It is significant and instructive, as bearing on the subject and design of the vision, which dwells with special interest on the aspect of affairs subsequent to the Persian dominion, that when it was imparted to Daniel, he had already lived under Medo-Persian rule during several years. Cf. Kranichfeld, p. Dan 340: After a series of prophetic announcements by Daniel had received a genuine prophetic fulfilment during the time of the exile itself, and, on the one hand the newly confirmed return of the exiles had been but lately realized, while on the other, the , which had been predicted instead of the Messianic glory, was feelingly demonstrated, e.g., by the disputes with the Samaritans, by the interruption of the building of the temple (cf. Ezr 3:8 with Dan 4:8), and, above all, by the continued aversion of the supreme Persian powers (cf. Dan 10:13; Dan 10:20), it now became the interest of the seer to devote special attention to the last heathen empire of the earth, the only one remaining to be demonstrated, and to present theocratically this last characteristic picture of hostility, in colors that would constantly impress its nature, and in such detail as the confidence springing from the unvarying success of the past would justify. Thoroughly convinced as he was, on the ground of his own observation and of the teaching of earlier prophecy that the Javanic west would eventually displace the east in the dominion of the world, and that at the same time the ultimate form of heathen government would appear in connection with the former, he would naturally not regard the transient Persian empire, which had indeed been adequately characterized at its very beginning, as the (cf. Dan 10:14; Dan 2:28; Dan 8:19) upon which prophecy elsewhere dwells by preference, but would rather consider the final form of heathen power over the theocracy in that light.Hitzig inquires Why Daniel was still at Babylon in the third year of Cyrus? Why so pious a theocrat, and so devoted a lover of Jerusalem and the holy land, had not returned thither? Why he should seem to place himself among the despisers of the holy mountain and among the apostates (Isa 65:11; Isa 66:5), by disregarding the exhortations of Isaiah 2 to return (Isa. 4:20; 52:11 et seq.)?to all of which the simple answer is, that while ranking as a highly esteemed and influential officer of the state, even under Persian rule (cf. 6:29), he must have been persuaded that he would be able to render his nation more important service with regard to the rebuilding of their city and temple, were he to remain behind to represent them at the court, than he possibly could were he to accompany them on their return to Juda. As a secondary consideration his somewhat advanced, age may have influenced his decision (despite Ezr 3:12), cf. Hvernick on the passage.Unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar. Cf. Dan 1:7; Dan 2:26; Dan 4:5; Dan 5:12. Both names are given in this place, for the reason, probably, that the two-fold relation which the prophet occupied (being connected with the Old-Test people of God, and also filling an official station at the court of the world-kingdom) and which is thus indicated, constituted the feature by which he was enabled to view the history of the conflict of Israel with the world-power, and to record for the benefit of his people what might be expected from the latter (Fller).And the thing was true; or, and the word is truth, i.e., the word of God which was revealed to the prophet, and which, unlike the words of so many false prophets of that time (Jer 29:8 et seq., 15), is not a lying and deceptive word, but truth, that is worthy of credit and shall surely come to pass; cf. 2Sa 7:28; 1Ki 8:26; also below, Dan 10:21; Dan 11:2; Dan 12:7.But the time appointed was long; rather, and great tribulation, supply, formed its subject is an additional predicate of (cf. Gen 11:1; Isa 7:24; Jer 26:2). Maurer renders it correctly: oraculum vocatur ab argumento, and also de Wette: and refers to great wretchedness. here denotes warfare, oppression, trouble, exactly as in Isa 4:2; not bravery, might (Vulg., Syr.), nor exertion, as if the great effort put forth by the prophet while receiving the revelation were alluded to (Hvern.), and least of all, ministering, as Ewald strangely conceived, referring to the numerous angels whom he regarded as being engaged in this new revelation with industrious energy and care (!).And he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision; rather, observed the word, and gave attention to the vision. is not an imperative (v. Lengerke, Ewald), but an infinitive with a perfect signification.[7] The construction with an accusative of the object is similar to that in Dan 9:2; cf. Dan 12:8. The following , although milel, is not an imperative (as v. Lengerke supposes, but a noun, which has the accent here on the first syllable, because of the accented that immediately follows; cf. Eze 19:14. The probable design of the statement that Daniel gave careful heed to what was revealed was to emphasize the highly significant and profoundly important subject of the vision from the outset, and also to give assurance of the credibility of the prophets narrative.
Dan 10:2-3. The frame of mind of Daniel and his outward deportment while receiving the revelation. Dan 10:2. In those days I Daniel was mourning three full weeks. The tidings respecting the discouraging state of affairs among the Jews, who had returned to the holy land, which may have reached Daniel about this time, may be regarded as the probable cause of his sadness. An especial cause of grief to him probably lay in the fact, that as the intervention of the Samaritans had interrupted the building of the temple since the second year after the return of the exiles (Ezr 4:4 et seq.; cf. Dan 3:8), the latter were prevented from observing the Passover in a lawful manner. His attention would be especially directed to that fact, since according to Dan 10:4, the period of three weeks spent by him in mourning and fasting was included in the very month of the feast of the Passover, so as to precede the date fixed for the beginning of that feast (which continued from the 14th to the 21st Nisan, the first month of the Jewish year) by twelve days, and to extend three days beyond its closeto the 24th Nisan. . The addition , which is designed to indicate the full or enumerated measure of the weeks (cf. our three full weeks), is hardly intended to contrast with the weeks of years which are implied in chap. 9; for the contrary cf. Gen 29:14; Gen 41:1; Num 11:20 et seq.; Jer 26:3; Jer 26:11, etc.8I ate no pleasant bread. , bread of pleasures, of desires, is doubtless a contrast to the bread of affliction, Deu 16:3, i.e., to the unleavened bread which was eaten during the Passover. Hence, the first expression of his grief mentioned by Daniel is that he abstained from the use of leavened bread, or from eating the or .9 Luthers rendering, I ate no dainty food, is therefore mistaken and inexact; and also Bertholdts, I abstained even from the use of bread.Neither came flesh nor wine in my mouth. A genuine fast, in which all dainty, attractive, or luxurious viands were avoided; cf. Gen 27:25; 2Sa 12:20; Isa 22:13, etc.Neither did I anoint myself; another characteristic indication of a sorrowful disposition, cf. Ecc 9:8; Psa 23:5; Isa 61:3, etc.Hitzigs view is substantially correct: The design of his mourning was not to support prayer and intercession as in chap. 9 (for which reason it does not assume its appropriate garb, cf. Psa 35:18; Psa 35:14), but rather to prepare to receive a revelation. However, the writer by no means entertains the opinion that asceticism could secure or compel a revelation; for in that case the means employed would have been increased, particularly as the vision was delayed. Daniel rather confines himself to abstinence from worldly enjoyment, in order to maintain the serious frame of mind in which the desired revelation should be received, and which is the only one that may hope to be blessed with a revelation.
Dan 10:4-7. Designation of the special time and place. Description of the appearance of the angel who conveys the revelation. And in the four and twentieth day of the first month. Since, according to Est 3:7, the first month was Nisan (cf. also 1Ma 7:49; 1Ma 9:3), and since by Dan 10:12-13, the mourning and fasting of Daniel began precisely twenty-one days before the present datetherefore on the third Nisan,the special reason why he commenced such exercises on that particular day may probably be found in the fact that the 1James , 2 d Nisan were still observed, at the period of the captivity, as they were already in the time of Saul and David, as the festival of the New-year or of the first new moon in the year; and it was of course unsuitable for him to fast while that joyous festival continued (cf. 1Sa 20:18, et seq.; 27:34, with 2:19, 6:29).I was by the side of the great river, which is Hiddekel. It cannot be easily determined whether he was there in vision merely, as in the similar case, Dan 8:2 (see on that passage), or likewise in body. The latter opinion (Hvern., v. Leng., Maurer, Hitzig, Kliefoth, Fller) appears to be preferable, in view of the subsequent mention of Daniels companions on the bank of the river.Concerning , i.e., probably, the swift, tearing (from ), as the Scriptural designation of the Tigris, cf. Gesen.-Dietrich, s. v., and also the expositors of Gen 2:14. The latter passage, moreover, clearly asserts the distinction between the Hiddekel and the Euphrates, which is observed throughout the Old-Test. generally, and thereby demonstrates the mistake of Syrus, who regards the in this place as denoting the Euphrates.
Dan 10:5. Then I lifted up mine eyes and looked, etc., exactly as in the vision on the banks of the Eulus, Dan 8:3.And behold a man clothed in linen. The description begins with his clothing, hence proceeds from without inward (contrary to the method of, e.g., Mat 17:2; Mat 28:3). White linen (, from , cf. Eze 9:2) was the garb of priests, especially of the high-priests (cf. Lev 16:4; Lev 16:23; Lev 6:3 with Isa 43:28), and therefore symbolizes holiness; the addition of golden ornaments denotes princely rank. The person here described was therefore at all events a (cf. Isa 43:28) or holy angelic prince, and more particularly, was identical with the mans voice between the Ulai, Dan 8:16, which directed Gabriel to interpret the vision for Daniel in that place, since according to Dan 12:6, he hovered over the river. It was shown on the former passage, that the angel who uttered that command need not necessarily have been superior to Gabriel, but that he may have belonged, as well as the latter, to the class of archangels or ; and he may be regarded as the compeer of Michael as well, despite Dan 10:13, where he refers to the aid he received from the latter against the prince of Persia. Hence, he was a third angel-prince besides Gabriel and Michael, whose name, however, is not given; and it is therefore vain to search for the specific name he bore. Hofmann, Auberlen and Fller conceive of this angelic prince as being the power of nature which operates for the kingdom of God in the entire heathen world, or as the good principle in the world-power, which is identical with the , 2Th 2:6; but they fail to establish exegetically, and in an adequate manner this identity, as well as the character ascribed to the angel. Concerning the modicum of truth which may nevertheless underlie this opinion, see Eth.-fund. principles, etc., No. 1.The identity of this angel with Michael, which Kranichfeld assumes, is opposed by the manner in which Michael is represented as not being present, in Dan 10:13; Dan 10:21. It is more probable that he was identical with Gabriel (Ewald et al.); but the appearance of the latter on his entrance in chap. 8 is described in different terms, and, moreover, the name of Gabriel is not expressly mentioned; cf. infra, on Dan 10:13.Whose loins were girded with fine gold of Uphaz; i.e., with the finest and most valuable gold; cf. Psa 45:8, gold of Ophir. The identity of and , which is assumed by, e.g., the Vulg., Chald., and Syr. (but not by Theodot.), is opposed by the different form of the name, and by the impossibility of transforming into .[10] The country here referred to (and in Jer 12:8) was probably a region in the south or east, and perhaps adjoining to Ophir, which abounded in gold, and like the latter, constituted a principal source from whence the people of hither Asia derived their precious metals in ancient times. The theory which seems best recommended is that of Hitzig, who combines the Sancr. name vipc = Hyphasis, with the supposition based on that etymology, that the country derived its name from a colony which came to Arabia Felix from the river Hyphasis in India. Cf. Ngelsbach on Jer., l. c., concerning this question.
Dan 10:6. His body also was like the beryl, or crysolite, hence having the golden lustre of topaz or amber, which shone through his garb of white linen. With regard to whose primary signification was doubtless the sea (= Sanscr. tarisha), and which afterward became the name of the celebrated colony of Phnician merchants located in Spain near the Mediterranean sea, and still later was employed to designate the precious stone brought from thence, which the Sept. and Josephus term the with probable correctnesssee Hitzig on Eze 1:16; Gesen.-Dietrich in the Handwrterbuch; and also my observation on Son 5:14.And his face as the appearance of lightning; cf. Eze 1:13; Mat 28:3. On the comparison of his eyes with lamps of fire cf. Rev 1:14, which passage is wholly imitated from the one before us.And his arms and feet like in colour to polished brass; rather, arms and feet like the gleam of glowing brass. , which primarily denotes the place of the feet, is here synonymous with , feet, as appears from the mention of , arms, in the same connection; for why, if the arms glowed like brass, should the place only of the feet present the same appearance and not rather the feet themselves? (against Kranichfeld, etc.).11 , the attribute of , together with (cf. Num 11:7), is taken from Eze 1:7. It denotes brass in a glowing and liquid or molten state (, a fuller form of the more usual , light, swiftly moving, volubilis), not merely shining or gleaming brass (Ewald, etc.), nor yet brass of the smelting furnace, as Hitzig assumes, putting entirely too artificial a sense on the idea. Cf., however, the parallel Rev 1:15, .And the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude, or of a roaring. primarily signifies the voice (sound) of a roaring, and may denote the roaring of the sea, of the stormy waves of the ocean, or of a great multitude of people (Theod., Vulg., Syr., and also moderns, e.g., Kranichfeld, Fller, etc.). The parallels, Eze 1:24 ( ); Eze 43:2; Isa 17:12; Rev 1:15, determine in favor of the former interpretation. The terrified prophet does not at first recognize what the speaker says in so dreadful a voice, either here or in Dan 10:9. Cf. the analogous circumstance in Dan 8:13 a.
Dan 10:7. The men that were with me saw not the vision; a feature similar to that connected with the conversion of St. Paul, Act 9:7; Act 22:11. It is impossible to determine who the prophets companions were; they may as well have been the servants of the highly esteemed prince Daniel (Dan 6:21), as associates of a different rank.But a great quaking fell upon them; evidently because they heard the dreadful sound of the roaring, although they saw nothing; cf. Gen 3:8; Amo 3:6; Act 9:7.12 They fled to hide themselves; rather, they fled hiding themselves. , properly, while hiding themselves, a periphrase of the gerund; cf. Gesenius, Thesaur., p. 175 a. The infinitive with would have expressed the somewhat different idea, they fled to hide themselves; cf. 1Ki 22:25; 2Ki 19:11.
Dan 10:8-11. The impression made on Daniel by the appearance of the angel. His temporary stupor, and subsequent and gradual restoration. I . saw this great vision. The same language is used with reference to the appearance of the Lord in the burning bush to Moses, Exo 3:3.My comeliness was turned in me into corruption; rather, the color of my face was changed into disfigurement for me. Literally, and my brightness, etc. (thus Ewald et al). , brightness, freshness of color, here corresponds to the Chald. , Dan 5:6; Dan 5:9; Dan 7:28. on me, seems to be a Chaldaism employed as a periphrase for the dative, and therefore to be equivalent to (unlike Dan 10:16). It is hardly to be separated from the verb and to be immediately connected with , thus periphrasing the genitive (against Hitzig)., properly, to destruction; cf. 2Ch 20:23. The following context indicates the nature of this destruction or disfigurement, by stating that the loss of color was joined to faintness and a total loss of strength.
Dan 10:9. Then was I in a deep sleep on my face, i.e., in a stupefied state, during which a total loss of his senses and of consciousness was depicted on his countenance.And my face (sank) toward the ground; i. e., the loss of consciousness was not momentary, but was protracted during some time, and brought him to the ground on his face. With a strange arbitrariness Hitzig finds an attention to trivial details that border closely on the comical in the statement that the face was toward the ground; as if the frequent expression (Gen 19:1; Gen 42:6) or (Gen 33:3, etc.) did not likewise indicate the apparently general use of in this sense! On the subject cf. Dan 8:17.
Dan 10:10. And behold, a hand touched me. The stunned prophet is not able to say whose hand it was; but the tenor of the entire representation shows, beyond the reach of doubt, that it was the hand of the same person who had hitherto been in his presence (cf. Dan 8:18; Eze 2:9). Kranichfeld (see above, on Dan 10:5) is therefore in error when, after having assumed that the angel described above was Michael, he regards the one who now appears and henceforth addresses Daniel as being Gabriel (as do Hvernick, Hengstenberg, etc.). Such a multiplication of persons is unnecessary, and is opposed by the total silence of the author with regard to the names of the appearance here introduced. Maurer, Hitzig, 5 Hofmann, Fller, Kliefoth, etc., correctly hold to the identity of the angel who touches Daniel with the one introduced in Dan 10:5.Set me (rather shook me) upon my knees and upon the palms of my hands; a constr. prgnans, for shook me and helped me, etc. The couching position which he accordingly assumed at first is the natural posture of one who is stunned and overwhelmed with awe in the presence of a superior being.
Dan 10:11. O Daniel, a man greatly beloved. See on Dan 9:23.For unto thee am I now sent; namely, sent at this precise moment, as the servant of God and the bearer of a message of blessing and comfort. The angel designs by this encouraging address not merely to induce Daniel to arise to an erect position, but also to fix his attention on the words about to be spoken. I stood tremblingin fearful expectation of the things to which he should listen; cf. Ezr 10:9.
Dan 10:12-14. The angels statement respecting the design of his coming and the reason of his delay to that time. Cf. Dan 9:23. For from the first day (therefore from the third Nisan, according to Dan 10:4) that thou didst set thine heart; properly gavest thy heart; cf. Ecc 1:13; Ecc 1:17.To understand, and to chasten (or humble) thyself before God. Dan 10:14 a states what Daniel desired to understand, viz.: the future experiences of his people. He sought to obtain the knowledge of this by humbling himself before God in fasting, etc. Consequently may be considered a hendiadys, to the extent to which the implied verbal idea is co-ordinated.And I am come for thy words, i.e., in consequence of the words of thy prayer to which reference has just been made. On , according to thy words, cf. for instance, Est 1:12; Est 3:15; Est 8:14; 1Ki 13:1, etc. The perfect , I have come, denotes that the coming of the angel, which had already been determined on at the beginning of the prophets prayer, had only then become an accomplished fact. The delay in his coming, which was caused by the interference of a hostile angelic power, is accounted for in the following verse.
Dan 10:13. But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days. . Jerome observes correctly, although upon a possibly inadequate exegetical foundation: Videtur mihi hic esse angelus, cui Persis credita est, juxta illud quod in Deuteronomio (Deu 32:8, lxx) legimus: Quando dividebat Altissimus gentes it disseminabat filios Adam, statuit terminos genitium juxta numeiurn angelorum Dei. Isti sunt principes, de quibus paulus apostolus loquitur: Sapientiam loquimur inter perfectos, quam nullus principum sculi hujus cognovit; si enim cognovissent, nunquam Dominum glori crucifixissent. Restitit autem princeps, i.e., angelus Persarum, facians pro credita sibi provincia, ne captivorum omnis populus dimitteretur. This interpretation is supported, and that of Calvin, Havernick, Kranichfeld, et al. which takes in the sense of king, earthly and human sovereign, is opposed by the following considerations: (1) in Dan 11:5, where is unquestionably employed in the latter sense, the connection is entirely different from the character of the present passage, where the which immediately follows obviously denotes angelic princes; (2) the Persian kings, on the other hand, are termed at the end of the verse; (3) the idea of an angels conflict with a human king seems very inappropriate; (4) the angel Michael was Israels prince, i.e., guardian angel, according to Dan 10:21; Dan 12:1; and corresponding to this, the prince of Persia who is here noticed, and the prince of Grcia mentioned in Dan 10:20, were, without doubt, the angels of Persia and Javan respectively; (5) the idea of guardian angels over entire realms, whether friendly or hostile in their disposition toward the theocracy, is attested by various Old-Test. parallels, particularly by Isa 24:21 (see Knobel on that passage); Isa 46:2; Jer 46:25; Jer 49:3 (where the gods of heathen nations take the place of the guardian angels); Deu 32:8; and Psa. 96:4, 70; also Bar 4:7 and Sir 17:17 (where seems to designate an angel prince, exactly like in this passage),to say nothing of New-Test, passages, such as 1Co 8:5; 1Co 10:20 et seq.The withstanding or resisting during twenty-one days is obviously to be understood sensu hostili (, as in Pro 21:30; cf. 2Sa 18:13), without, however, involving the idea that the Persian court, or any earthly locality whatever, was the scene of such opposition or warfare (as, e.g., Fller assumes). That adversari may more probably have taken place in super-mundane regions; and that this was the case seems to have been attested by parallels like 1Ki 22:19 et seq.; Job 1:6; Job 2:1 et seq.; Luk 10:18; Luk 22:31. Hofmann (Schriftbew., I. 286 et seq.) and Fller hold that the prince of the kingdom of Persia does not denote an actual guardian angel of that realm, but any evil spirit whatever, who may have sought to exert an influence on the decisions of the Persian king, while on the contrary the angel who appeared to Daniel sought to counteract that influence by his own, as being more beneficial to Israel;13 but this opinion is altogether too artificial, because it supposes two spiritual powersthe one good and the other evilin every case (a court-angel and a royal court-devil, in the language of Starke), as exerting influence over the ruler of a kingdom. Moreover, the idea of the spirit ruling at a court, as being either good or bad, either peaceful or warlike, has too modern an aspect, and is foreign to the modes of conception that were current among the ancient Orientals. The strongest argument against this opinion, however, consists in the consideration that the title , and farther on, the appellations and (Michael, the prince of Israel; Dan 10:21, cf. Dan 10:20), imply a more intimate connection, a much closer and more constant relation between the angel and the corresponding nation than is involved in a merely temporary influence over the governmental policy of any particular ruler. A spirit who may have exercised a temporary control over the decisions of one or more Persian kings could not on that account simply be designated the , The angel who is thus entitled must be considered the constant patron of the Persian nation and state, as much so as Michael was the constant patron of Israel, having been known as such in the age of Joshua (Jos 5:13) as well as in that of Daniel, and still later, in that of the New-Test, apocalyptist (Rev 12:7; Jdg 1:9). For additional thoughts on the subject see on Dan 10:20-21, and the Eth. fund, principles.And lo, Michael, one of the chief princes; properly, one of the first (), i.e., of the most eminent; cf. 1Ch 18:17, and also , Dan 12:1. The name Michael, quis sicut Deus (cf., e.g., Exo 15:11; Psa 89:7), and also the name of Isaiahs prophetic contemporary (=) is, according to Hanebergs correct observation (in Reuschs Theol. Literaturbl, 1867, No. 3, p. 72), a name that sounds like a decided monotheistic protest against every undue exaltation of the angelic dignity. It expresses still more strongly than the similar name of Gabriel (cf. on Dan 8:16), the idea of Gods incomparable and assisting power, as whose instrument the angelic being who bears this name must be regarded (Kranichfeld). His coming to help is probably to be conceived of as an armed intervention, and supported by celestial hosts, as is suggested by the preceding warlike phrase , and as the term in Dan 10:20 indicates still more clearly. Michael must be conceived of in this place as battling at the head of an angelic host, as in Jos 5:14 and Rev 12:7; cf. also Gen 32:2; 2Ki 6:17, and other references to hosts of celestial angels. How little this belligerent attitude of Michael comports with the view of Hofmann and Fller, that the speaker was a special good spirit of the heathen world-power, whose battle with the prince of Persia was fought in the circles of the Persian court, will be apparent at once. Concerning the theory of the older exegetes and also of Hvernick, which directly identifies Michael with Christ, see Eth. fund principles, No. 1, and also on Dan 12:1.And I remained there with the kings of Persia; rather, and I became superfluous there, etc., namely, because another who was still more powerful than I had relieved me, and now represented me in the resistance to be made to the prince of Persia. The angel says that his presence became superfluous with the kings of Persia because he refers to all the powers who operate at the head of the Persian empire, including both the earthly and the super-earthly, the guardian spirit and the king beside his chief officers (cf. Isa 24:21 et seq.; Isa 57:9; Psa 82:6; also the more extended signification of kings [= great ones, mighty ones], which occurs, e. g., in Psa 2:2; Job 29:25; Eze 26:7; 1Ki 11:24). The difiicult must probably be explained in this way (with Ewald and partly also with Hitzig). The explanation offered by others, and thus it happened that I remained or tarried during an extended period with the kings of Persia (Vulg.: et ego remansi ibi, etc.; Syr., Dereser, Rosenm., Kranichf., etc.), is opposed by the fact that does not properly signify to remain behind, but to remain over, to be superfluous (at the most, it might be possible to adduce Gen 32:25 in support of the former meaning); and also that the construction of the sentence does not justify its being regarded as a supplement or complementary explanation of the remainder of the verse. The translation of Luther, Geier, Winer, Gesenius, Hvernick, etc.: and I gained the ascendancy, or the victory, with the kings of Persia, is likewise at variance with the general usage of . The explanation of Fller (and Hofmann [also Keil), and I then maintained my place beside the kings of Persia, certainly accords better with the usage; but it is opposed by the consideration adduced above, concerning the assumption of two angelic powers who contend for the greatest influence over the Persian king. Nor can it be understood on that theory why the plural was used instead of the singular; for, although the opinion that the writer intended Cyrus together with his successors, hence the entire Persian dynasty, by his kings of Persia, has recently become an especial favorite (being accepted likewise by Fller and Hofmann), it seems to us so improbable in itself, that even the adoption of the theory which asserts the Maccaban origin of the book, could scarcely serve to establish it (cf. especially Hitzig, who contends for the more extended signification of upon substantial grounds). The Sept. (and Theodot.) renders the passage correctly with regard to its meaning: (sc. ) .
Dan 10:14. I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days. Cf. the introductory words of Jacobs blessing, Gen 49:1; also Num 24:14. Concerning as a designation of the Messianic future (the issue of the ages, Fller), cf. on Dan 2:28. The end of the indignation, mentioned in Dan 8:19, is not materially different from this end of (pre-Messianic days.For yet the vision is for many days; rather, for yet a vision for those days, supply I now bring, am about to reveal. , the days, those days, viz.: the latter days just mentioned. is probably to be taken (with Fller and C. B. Michaelis) as referring indirectly back to the two preceding visions which treated of the latter days, hence to chapters 8 and 9. (cf. especially Dan 8:19 b and Dan 9:23 et seq.). Consequently the angel now brings yet an eschatological prophecy, yet a vision of the last times which forms the final and most specific revelation. None of the other interpretations yield a clear sense that agrees with the context, e.g., that by Hitzig: but it is yet continually a prophecy for ages; by Hvernick, for the prophecy to be imparted to thee shall extend to this time (similarly Kranichfeld: , exceeding the present and the immediate future in its range); the highly artificial one by Cocceius: expectatio promissionis adhuc protelabitur, nempe per ista tempora, qu partim c. 8, partim c. 9 descripta sunt, etc.
Dan 10:15-17. The prophets renewed consternation, in consequence of the reverential awe felt by him in the presence of his super-human visitor, who therefore now assumes an increasingly human bearing (see Dan 10:16 a; cf. Dan 10:18 a). I set my face toward the ground and became dumb; the same attitude of reverential awe as in Luk 18:13; Luk 24:5.The prophets dumbness was twice removed by the comforting interference of the angel (Dan 10:16 et seq. and Dan 10:19); but he afterward remained speechless, excepting that he asked the brief question in Dan 12:8. And behold one like the similitude of the sons of men touched my lips, or, like the sons of men he touched my lips; the subject is not indicated here (and in Dan 10:18), which does not, however, permit a doubt to arise that the. one after the similitudeof men is identical with the angel who was hitherto present. serves to recall the , Dan 7:13, as in Dan 10:18 recalls the similar expression in Dan 8:15. An identity with Gabriel, however, cannot be established on this repeated assurance of the angels manlike appearance (against Kranichf.).The touching of the lips (for the purpose of unsealing and opening them) is similar to the incident in Isa 6:7; Jer 1:9. O my lord, by the vision my sorrows are turned upon me. There is nothing strange in the form of the prophets address to the angel, which terms him my lord, particularly since the angel belonged to the class of chief princes; cf. Jos 5:14; Jdg 6:13. With regard to , sorrows, properly, pains, cf. Isa 13:8; Isa 21:3; 1Sa 4:19. , my sorrows (cf. Psa 18:24), characterizes the acuteness of the terrified sensation alluded to more impressively than could have been done by merely; and since the term is obviously employed in a tropical sense only, it does not sound strange from the lips of a man (against Hitzig), and does not require to be obviated by means of putting an unusual sense on , e.g., by my joints trembled in me (Vulg., Luther, Berth., Hvernick, Fller), or by my features were changed (Ewald, following Psa 49:15). Dan 10:17. And how can the servant of my lord talk, etc. , as in 1Ch 13:2, a Chaldaism for .As for me (properly and I) straightway there remained no strength in me, neither is there breath left in me; i. e., the power to stand and breathe regularly (1Ki 10:5; Jos 2:11) departed from me afresh. The renewed consternation described in these words was not as great as the former, in Dan 10:9; the ceasing of the breath was not in a literal sense as in 1Ki 17:17, but only figurative, as in the similar form of speech, Son 5:6.A majority of recent expositors correctly regard this second member of the verse as no longer belonging to Daniels address to the angel; for if it were still included, the words there is no strength in me would have been employed twice in close proximity (Dan 10:16 b and here) and in nearly the same form. Moreover, the incident of the two following verses requires a suitable preparation.Fller, however, is entirely too artificial when he includes the words and I in Daniels explanation to the angel, but excludes everything else, to the close of his remarks.
Dan 10:18-19. The prophet is touched and strengthened for the third time, and more effectually than before (cf. Dan 10:5; Dan 10:16). The being touched and strengthened three times by the angel (in which old-churchly exegetes, e.g., Ephraem, etc., sought to find an allusion to the Trinity) was certainly not accidental; cf. the conflict of Christ in Gethsemane, Mat 26:38 et seq.; his being tempted thrice in the desert, Mat 4:1 et seq.; also such passages as Joh 21:15 et seq.; Act 10:16; 2Co 12:8 et seq., etc. Hitzig, however, being utterly unaware of the profound mystical meaning of the description, thinks that the broad representation that he was gradually invigorated, at first to speak himself, and afterward to listen to speech (Dan 10:16; Dan 10:19 b), has a manufactured appearance, and does not impress.Like the appearance of a man; cf. on Dan 10:16.
Dan 10:19. Peace be unto thee; be strong, yea, be strong. ; cf. , Jos 1:6-7; Jos 1:9; and with regard to the repetition of the verb, as strengthening the idea, cf. Jer 10:25; Jer 51:34, etc.For thou hast strengthened me, viz.: sufficiently to enable me to listen with courageous composure to all that is to be revealed, not excepting even what is calamitous and terrible.
Dan 10:20chap Dan 11:1. Solemn and circumstantial introduction of the subsequent detailed description of the future, connected with an encouraging reference to the constant readiness of God to assist Israel, despite the serious character of the situation of the time (and particularly, despite the dangers which threatened from the direction of Persia and Javan).Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? i.e., art thou aware of the serious and highly important character of the message which I am to deliver unto thee? Dost thou sufficiently estimate the tremendous earnestness of the situation, in consequence of which my mission became necessary?And now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia. That is, the peaceful service of disclosing the future unto thee, in which I am now engaged, forms but a brief interruption to the great war which I must continue steadily to wage against the guardian spirit of the Persian power. With regard to , considered as denoting an actual warfare rather than a mere altercation or dispute in the council of the angels of God (as Bertholdt and others think), see on Dan 10:13.And when (as soon as) I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grcia shall come. The going forth in this passage, as often in descriptions of warlike incidents (e.g., Jos 14:11; 1Ki 2:7; 1Sa 8:20; Isa 42:12; Zec 14:10), certainly denotes a going forth to battle rather than the mere departing from a locality (Hofmann, Fller, etc.). The observation does not, however, refer to his going forth to meet the prince of Persia, but a going forth to other conflicts after the war with the latter shall have been brought to a close; or, in other words, it denotes a going forth out of the war against the prince of Persia (so Jacchiad., Bertholdt, Hitzig, Kranichfeld, etc.correctly). The sense is therefore: Scarcely shall the Persian war be ended, when the Greek arises against me; the conflict with the Grcian world-power shall be immediately consequent on the war with that of Persia.[14] Cf. the similar contrasting of and in 2Ki 11:5; 2Ki 11:7. Hofmanns exposition of the passage is altogether too labored: The prince of the Grcians enters into the quarrel against the prince of the Persians, from which the angel retires; but, after the Persian empire has fallen, the angel renews the conflict with the new adversary, and, as in the former instance, is supported by Michael, the prince of Israel (Schriftbew, I. 290; cf. Weissag. und Erfltung, 1:312 et seq.). Hofmann, however, properly rejects v. Lengerkes view, on which the coming of the prince of Grcia must be regarded as victorious, and leading to the defeat of the angel. Hitzig, on the other hand, comes especially near to the latter theory, in his venturesome assertion that the angelic prince who converses with Daniel, and who is to battle against Persia and afterward against Greece, represents the guardian spirit of Egypt, as of a power that had been friendly to the Jews in former ages and that especially made common cause with them against Syria (= Javan) in the period of the Seleucid!a bold hypothesis, that has no support in the context, and that is absolutely incompatible with the expressions of sacred awe and reverence which Daniel made use of toward this celestial , according to Dan 10:5 et seq. Daniel would have been an idolater of the coarsest kind had he rendered such homage as is described in this chapter, and particularly in Dan 10:16-19, to the angelic patron and representative of Egypt (whom he assuredly regarded as a dmonic power inimical to God, no less than those of Persia and Javan). And a possible Maccaban pseudo-Daniel would have been still less likely than the Daniel of the ra of the captivity, to involve himself in the guilt of so gross a violation of the monotheistic principle and of disobedience to the first commandment in the decalogue.
Dan 10:21. But I will show thee that which is noted in the Scripture (or book) of truth. , but still, a strong adversative particle, serves here to introduce the antidote to the fears for the theocracy excited by Dan 10:20in the shape of a comforting allusion to the ultimate welfare and blessing which are awaiting Gods people according to the book of Divine providence, despite all the conflicts and sufferings that must precede them. Properly, in a book of truth, i.e., in a Divine document upon which the yet unrevealed (Deu 32:34) fortunes of nations (Rev 5:1) as well as of individuals (Psa 139:16) in the future are entered (Hitzig). Cf. the books of judgment in Dan 7:10, and also the term in Dan 11:2, which briefly comprehends the contents of the book of truth.And there is none that holds with me in these things; rather, and yet there is none that exerts himself with me against these, i.e., against the guardian angels of Persia and Javan, the dmonic patrons of the heathen world-powers. On , exerting oneself with another, battling beside one, supporting one, cf 1Sa 4:9; 2Sa 10:12. The participle characterizes the action, although future, as nevertheless being constant.But (only) Michael your prince,namely, in the sense of Jos 5:13 et seq.; cf. supra, on Dan 10:13. The sentence and there is none. your prince, taken as a whole, is not intended to justify the greatness of the sufferings through which Israel must pass (Hofmann), or the long duration of the prospective conflict with the world-powers (Fller); it simply aims to place in a clearer light the help afforded by the grace of God, which requires no foreign support in order to protect, and eventually to fully deliver Israel (Kranichf.). The sentence would still express the idea of the self-sufficiency of the good spiritual powers in the kingdom of God. which require no aid from the world, and also of their ability to effect all things, even if it were made (as Fller proposes) dependent on , and consequently if (in disregard of the accentuation) it were translated, But I will show thee that which is noted, etc., . and the absence of one to help me, etc. In that case, however, it would present two very dissimilar objects of the angels remarks as co-ordinate with each other, the former of which is very general in its character, and the latter equally specific; and this rendering would not obviate the incongruous relation between the contents of the former half of the verse and those of the latter, which exists in any case. Dan 11:1. Also I in the first year of Darius the Mede, even I, stood to confirm and to strengthen him, or, As I also.. stood by him as a supporter and helper; properly, and I also. begins a new sentence (cf. Psa 30:7; Job 19:25) which does not stand in an adversative relation to the preceding verse (Hitzig), nor serve to explain it (Luther, etc.), but which is comparative. It describes the relation by which the angel who now speaks and Michael, the prince of Israel, assisted each other, as being reciprocal. serves to repeat the without regard to sequence, and I.. my standing was as his support, etc. Cf. Job 9:27; Zep 3:20; and respecting the use of sensu bellico s. militari cf. supra, Dan 10:13 and Dan 8:25. to him. Hvernick and Hitzig propose to refer this particle to rather than to Michael, because the strong terms and are supposed to warrant the conclusion that the one to whose support he came was a being inferior to the assisting angel, which would not apply to the relation of the latter to Michael. But in view of all the teaching of this section, a martial angelic prince may well be in occasional need of the aid and support of another, without being inferior to the latter on that account; and in support of the view that Michael, the guardian angel of Israel, was obliged to put forth special efforts in behalf of his wards, and therefore required the assistance of other good angelic powers to an unusual degree, precisely in the first year of Darius the Mede, or at the period when the world-power passed from the Chaldans to the Medo-Persians, it will be sufficient to refer to chap.6 and to Dan 9:1 et seq. (cf. Zec 1:12). Cf. Hofmann, Schriftbew., I. 289, and also Fller, p. Dan 279: The first verse of chap. 11 is thus intimately connected with the last verse of chap. 10; and it was unwise to separate them, and thereby to confuse the train of thought (by referring to Darius the Mede). If it be asked, what interests were at stake in the first year of Darius, the answer will be, the position which the new dynasty should occupy toward the people of Israel. And it may be seen from the narrative in chap. 6 that efforts were made in that particular year to place it in a hostile attitude toward that people. It was in that juncture that the good angel of the world-power stood by Michael, the prince of Israel, until he prevailed; in the coming conflict Michael shall support him.
ethico-fundamental principles related to the history of salvation, apologetical remarks, and homiletical suggestions
1. The characteristic and leading feature of the contents of this section is angelological in its nature. An angelic being is introduced and described in an unusually minute and life-like manner, whom we (see on Dan 10:5; Dan 10:13) cannot regard as being identical with the Gabriel of chapters 8 and 9, nor yet with Michael, to whom he repeatedly refers in the communications addressed by him to Daniel; but the important disclosures made by this being respecting the nature and functions of several leading representatives of the angelic world, and the exalted rank and powerful influence within that world claimed by him, no less than his tremendous influence on the fortunes of earthly empires, justify the careful description of which he is the object (Dan 10:5-7), as well as the expressions of profound reverence addressed to him by Daniel (according to Dan 10:8-11; Dan 10:15-19). These expressions, together with the counteracting efforts of the angel called forth by them, by which he designed to strengthen and encourage the terrified and overwhelmed prophet, are analogous to the incidents connected with the appearance of Gabriel to Daniel in Dan 8:15 et seq.; but while the prophets fainting and his restoration by Gabriel occurred but once in that instance (see on Dan 10:18), the same features appear thrice in this connection, leading to the conclusion that this nameless angelic prince is of extraordinary importance, and at least equals, if he does not outrank Michael, the captain of the Lords host (Jos 5:13). As the latter comes to his assistance (Dan 10:13; Dan 10:21), so he affords aid to that prince in return (Dan 11:1) in the conflict with the princes of Persia and Javan, the angels who fight against God at the head of the heathen world-power. The latter likewise appear to be possessed of exalted power, and therefore as terrible spiritual beings who are dangerous to the kingdom of God and its representatives. They are powerful dmons who bear the name princes, archangels, by virtue of their influential rank in the kingdom of darkness, with as much propriety as do Gabriel, Michael, etc., by virtue of their position in the kingdom of light. The power of the evil angels, however, is only transient and perishable, like that of the empires over which they rule, while the angelic princes of light, Michael and the nameless one, who stand in the service of God, triumph over them all in succession, although the victory may only be achieved by effort and determined conflict.
But who is this nameless one, this mysterious being, to whom not even the predicate is applied, although doubtless belonging to him, to say nothing of a definite nomen proprium being assigned to him?Are we, in connection with many older expositors (e.g., Vitringa, C. B. Michaelis, Rambach, Starke, etc.), to identify him with Christ, the uncreated angel of the Lord, whom Daniel repeatedly addressed as , and whose description is said to be strikingly similar to that of the Son of man in Dan 7:13 et. seq. (with which compare especially Dan 10:16; Dan 10:18), and also to that of Christ in the Apocalypse (Rev 1:13-18; Rev 10:1-6)? This opinion is at all events more probable than that of the interpreters who identify Michael instead with Christ (Melancthon, Geier, Jo. Lange, Neubauer, Disput. de Michaele archangelo, Hvernick, etc.); but it is opposed, and the created nature of the angel is implied, by the following considerations: (1) he describes himself in Dan 10:11 as a messenger sent from God to bear a Divine message to Daniel (similar to Gabriel in Dan 8:16 et seq.; Dan 9:20 et seq.): (2) his difficulty in combating the protecting angels of the world-powers, even necessitating his being supported by other angelic princes, contrasts strongly with the manner in which the former visions describe the triumph of Christ over the world-empires opposed to him; see especially Dan 2:44 et seq. and Dan 7:13; Dan 7:22; Dan 7:26; (3) the circumstance already noticed in Dan 10:16, that the address my lord, together with the other features of the description which aim at the exaltation and glorifying of this angel, are elsewhere applied to angels who were certainly created; e.g., in Jos 5:14, to the captain of the Lords host; Jdg 6:13, to the angel who appeared to Gideon; Jdg 13:8, to the angel whom Manoah saw; cf. also Rev 19:10; Rev 22:8 et seq. We shall consequently be compelled to assume that the messenger sent from God to Daniel, as here introduced, was an angel proper, and distinct from the Son of God (see Jerome, Theodoret, and a majority of church fathers, on this passage). But what position of rank and power is to be attributed to him, orin case he is at once co-ordinated with Michael and Gabriel in these respects (as we have done on Dan 10:5), and is therefore regarded as an archangelwhat particular office and functions are to be assigned to him, is after all a difficult question, and can hardly be answered with full exegetical certainty. The range of the angels activity would become too limited if he were identified with the third of the archangels mentioned by name in the Old Test., beside Gabriel and Michael, viz.: with the Raphael of the apocryphal book Tobit, or if he were degraded to the rank of a mere guardian angel over Egypt (Hitzig; see on Dan 10:20). On the other hand, his authority would become too extensive, and his position too exalted, if he were conceived of as the mighty governor of all earthly nature, the Divinely appointed ruler and spiritual guide of the whole terrestrial world, thus assigning to him a sphere similar to that occupied by the demiurge of the Gnostics, or the earth-spirit of Goethe in his prologue to Faust, or to that given by the ingenious natural philosopher, Max Perty (in his work ber die mystischen Erscheinungen der menschlichen Natur, 1862), to the geodmon, the regent of our planet, who is regarded as the spiritual principle that presides over the earth, the human race, and the development of both. To assume such an earth-spirit, which is neither Scriptural nor natural, and which has no support even in the magical and mystical phenomena of human life (cf. the thorough criticism of this hypothesis in L. Giesebrechts lecture on Das Wunder in der deutschen Geschichtbeschreibung neuerer Zeit, Stettin, 1868, p. 10 et seq.), would be to disregard the tenor of this section, as certainly as it characterizes the angel as being decidedly supernatural, and at the same time (in Dan 10:5 et seq.) endows him with external attributes of his rank such as would be but poorly adapted to the position and functions of a telluric planetary spirit. Accordingly, if any particular explanation whatever of the nature and office of this angel is to be attempted, the opinion of Hofmann which was noticed above, on Dan 10:5, is to be decidedly preferred to all others (Weissagung und Erfllung, I. 312 et seq.; Schriftbeweis, I. 287 et seq.). That opinion has also been adopted by Auberlen (Daniel, etc., p. 67), Fller, Baumgarten, Luthardt, Riggenbach (on 2Th 2:6), and others. It assumes that the angel in question represents the good spirit of the heathen world-power, while the princes of Persia and Javan opposed by him and Michael, represent the evil principle which is hostile to God, and which manifests itself in the development of the heathen world-power. The former is that power in nature which operates in favor of Gods kingdom throughout the heathen world, the good spirit, which is to promote in the heathen world the realization of Gods purpose of salvation; the latter are powers opposed to God, who seek to cross and neutralize the plans of God and of the good angel, which aim at the salvation of the world. The former is the restraining principle ( , 2 Thess., l. c.) which restrains and prevents the ascendancy and prevalence of the height of Satanic wickedness in human history; the latter, on the contrary, endeavor to hinder and retard the progress of the kingdom of God. We regard this view as harmonizing well with the contents of the chapter before us, and can permit a partial departure from it only in so far as (1) we must consider it doubtful whether St. Paul intended to definitely and consciously allude precisely to the angel here described by the word or ; (2) so far as we regard the conflict of the angel with those foes as an actual warfare in the invisible regions of the spirit-world, and not as a mere supplanting in the favor of the king and his court, because of the termini bellici employed in Dan 10:13; Dan 10:20 et seq.; (3) so far as we are compelled to regard the foes against whom the angel contended, as being the actual spiritual protectors of the world-kingdoms in question, and as dmonic powers or Satanic angels, who have entered on a permanent connection with the kingdoms over which they rule, in consequence of which they stand or fall with them (cf. on Dan 10:13). The idea of guardian angels, or, more exactly, the idea of certain dmonic spiritual beings ( , 2Co 12:7) as being at the head of the antitheistic world-monarchies and as fundamentally opposed to Michael, the prince of the theocracy, is not only countenanced by the leading authorities of the older exegetical tradition (Luther, Melanc, Calov, Geier, C. B. Michaelis, Starke, and in substance also Jerome, Theodoret, and the older Roman Catholic expositors, excepting that they mistake the Satanic evil character of the princes of Persia, etc., to a greater or less extent), but it is likewise based on all the passages in both the Old and New-Test. Scriptures, which represent the gods of the heathen world as dmons, and consequently, the heathen lands or states over which they rule and exercise spiritual authority as being provinces of the kingdom of darkness (cf. the expositors of 1Co 8:6; 1Co 10:20 et seq., especially Kling, vol. 7 of the New-Test. part of the Bible-work).15
2. This estimate of the contents of the chapter does not affect its credibility, nor does it oblige us to conclude that the section originated at the hands of a pseudo-Daniel in the Maccaban age. Fllers remarks on these points, p. 272 et seq., are especially pertinent. We transfer to this place an epitome of this authors apology for the doctrine of angels, as contained in this section, although it is connected with views that diverge somewhat from ours, and that especially contain no correct estimate of the idea of guardian angels: This is the meaning of our text. Shall we consider it a rabbinical idea and a Jewish fable? I cannot even find that it is entirely foreign to our modern conceptions. Do we not frequently speak of the spirit that reigns in the influential circles of a court? Is it not well understood that propositions which conflict with that spirit have no prospect of being approved, unless the prevailing spirit should be superseded by a different one? That is exactly what the text affirmsalthough certainly with a difference; for our age speaks of spirit without understanding a personal spiritual being by that term. Spirit is a current word in its mouth, but it becomes embarrassed when asked how it conceives of spirit. As God, in the consciousness of modern times, has taken refuge in the guise of a universal spirit, of which it may be affirmed that it is, and that it is not, with equal propriety, so the spirits are involved in a similar predicament; they have dissolved into vapor. The Scriptures, however, teach a different doctrine. They have and know a personal God and personal spirits, and teach that the latter include some who do the will of God, while others resist it. If we assume accordingly that such spirits exist, it will not surprise any mind that they should be active and influential (cf. Gen 32:1 et seq.; 2Ki 6:17, etc.). According to the Scriptures as a whole, the angels are the agents through whom God governs the world, and they are concerned in many things where we do not suspect their presence. The only new feature in the passage is that they are employed in influencing the decisions of the rulers of the world; but this is not surprising, since they are concerned to realize or prevent the Divine purposes. The world-power interferes in the fortunes of Israel; should God quietly look on while His will is counteracted? In such a case he opposes the evil spirit by His spirit, so that spirit combats against spirit, etc. Auberlen expresses ideas exactly similar, p. Dan 67: The Holy Scriptures only ask of us that we should take in a real sense the language we are accustomed to employ in a figurative sense, respecting a conflict of the good and the evil spirit in man. Similar ideas prevail in 1Sa 16:13; 1Sa 16:15; 1Ki 22:22; the Satanic influences with which we become better acquainted through the words of Jesus and the apostles are nothing different in their nature. This does not argue that the freedom of human action is thereby destroyed; for the influence of spirits over the inner nature of man is not irresistible, and their principal attention may perhaps be given to the shaping of external circumstances. The question concerning the relation of the Divine government to the freedom of man does not become more difficult by the additional feature of the service of angels, but, on the contrary, becomes more intelligible.Cf. also Blumhardt, Ueber die Lehre von den Engeln, in Vilmars Pastoral-Theol. Blttern, 1865, I. p. Dan 32: If Christ is presented to us as he who shall reign until all his foes are made the footstool for his feet, his reigning is always realized through the means of angels who are sent forth, and over whom is placed a special angel, Michael being prominent among them; and the fact that so little is said respecting the persons of the warring angels, who must be regarded as constantly reappearing, produces in us the more positive and elevating impression, as it is always the same battle from the beginning and down to the consummation of Gods kingdom, when he shall have put down all opposing rule, and all authority and power (1Co 15:24). In this light we learn to lose sight of the strangeness of a name also, e.g., that of Michael (who is like God?), and see that the names found in the Scriptures have not the slightest connection with the follies of the Jewish doctrine concerning angels, which includes extended registers of angels names. But we also learn how easy it is, when the Word is carefully and thoroughly studied, to set aside the sneering objections of opponents, who judge everything superficially by its appearance, and are ready to throw it into the lumber-room of superstitions, if we only guard against being moved from our simplicity by the power of a worldly wisdom that overlooks the kernel of everything.
3. Nor does the chapter contain anything aside from the doctrine of angels that is not well adapted to the time of Daniel, and to the captive prophet Daniel as its author. This has already been shown with reference to several particulars. It only remains to call attention to the alleged historical improbability contained in Dan 10:1, that Daniel did not return to the holy land with Zerubbabel and Joshua, as being a circumstance that on the contrary lends very little support to the Maccaban-tendency hypothesis. For while it is a sufficient explanation of that fact that the aged and esteemed prophet remained at Babylon for the special purpose of promoting the welfare of his compatriots and of the theocracy (see on that passage), it is certainly improbable that a writer of the Maccaban period, who should have invented this narrative in the interest of a tendency, would have left his hero in a strange land, among the many indifferent and apostate ones (cf. 1Ma 1:13 et seq.; 1ma 44:55), when a suitable opportunity was presented for his return, and while his own heart was animated with a glowing love for the pleasant land (, Dan 8:9; Dan 11:16).The zealous fasting of Daniel (Dan 10:2 et seq.) serves as little as the circumstance above referred to, to render probable the composition of the chapter in the Maccaban age; for the prophets fasting does not bear an ascetic and work-righteous character, such as was adapted to the spirit of the later Judaism, and especially to the Alexandrian Judaism, inasmuch as the cause of the gracious acceptance of the supplicant while yearning for deliverance, is shown by Dan 10:12 to have been, not his fasting, but the fervent and persistent prayer which accompanied it. In this character of a mere accompaniment and outward sign of sorrow because of national and religious misfortunes, fasting (together with related usages connected with mourning, e.g., abstaining from anointing, the wearing of sackcloth, sitting in ashes, etc.) was practised, long prior to the captivity, by the earliest representatives of the prophetic order, such as Elijah, Joel, Isaiah, etc. (cf. 1Ki 17:6; 1Ki 19:4 et seq.; Joe 1:14; Joe 2:12; Isa 20:2 et seq.); so that the similar conduct of Daniel, which becomes additionally appropriate in view of its being connected with the occurrence of the feast of the Passover, does not seem remarkable or untimely in the least.In opposition to Hitzigs assertion that the remarks of the angel in Dan 10:21; Dan 11:1, contain an allusion to the political relations of Egypt with Syria and Palestine in the Maccaban period, see supra, on these passages.
4. The homiletical treatment of the chapter will have regard primarily and principally to its angelological features. In this respect attention will naturally be directed less to the nature and employment of the angels brought to our notice than to their relation to the designs and modes of operation of the Divine providence which employs them as instruments in its service. The influence of God on the fortunes of the world-empires and the decisions of their rulers, as being exerted through the agency of angels, and as employing the power of the mighty princes of the spirit-world for the welfare of mansuch will probably be the theme of a meditation on the contents of the section as a whole. In connection with this it will be proper to refer to passages like Psa 34:3; Psa 103:20 et seq.; Heb 1:14, etc., and to illustrate and enforce them in their profound truth and comforting power, by the subject of this chapter.
Homiletical suggestions on particular passages: On Dan 10:1, Melancthon: Nova visio exhibetur jam Daniel, non solum ut ipse et cteri pii in hoc prsenti periculo confirmentur, sed etiam et posteritas prmoneatur de pripuis mutationibus imperiorum et de iis calamitatibus, qu Jud impendebant.. Habes Ecclesi imaginem, quam Deus vult et exerceri afflictionibus et fide expectare liberationem. Et cum liberat, tamen eventus non respondent nostris conjecturis. Cum Cyri beneficium impeditum esset, postea magis conspici potuit, a Deo gubernari hanc liberationem, cum lot impedimenta incidissent, qu humanis consiliis tolli non poterant.
On Dan 10:2, Jerome: Secundum anagogen vero hoc dicendum est, quod qui in luctu est et sponsi luget absentiam, non comedit panem desiderabilem, qui de clo descendit, neque solidum capit cibum, qui intelligitur in carne, nec bibit vinum, quod Itificat cor hominis, nec exhilarat faciem in oleo (Psa 104:15). Hoc autem jejunio sponsa impetrabiles facit lacrimas, quondo sponsus fuerit ablatus ab ea, etc.Cramer: To fast and prepare the body is indeed a proper external discipline, not to deserve something thereby, as the Papists do, but in order to a still better preparation: Mat 6:17 et seq.
On Dan 10:4, Geier: Juxta hunc fluvium se fuisse dicit propheta, jejunio hactenus maceratus precibusque vacans devotis, sine dubio, ut animum nonnihil recrearet hac loci jucundioris contemplatione, si quidem ad hujusmodi fluviorum ripas amni nonnunquam dantur colles, valles auluci arboribus consiti, ubi undarum suaviter audiuntur susurri adeoque non exigua simul suppeditatur ansa recolendi beneficia tam creationis, quam conservationis redemtionis, etc. Cf. Psa 137:1 et seq.; Eze 1:1 etc.
On Dan 10:8 et seq., Calvin: Deus non ideo terret suos, quoniam ipsum oblectet nostra perturbatio, sed quoniam id nobis utile est, quia scilicet nunquam erimus idonei ad discendum, nisi carne nostra prorsus subacta. Hoc autem necesse fieri violento modo propter pervicaciam nobis ingenitam.Starke: Behold in this the goodness and friendliness of God, who not only knows how to terrify, but also causes the terrified ones to be comforted and strengthened!
On Dan 10:11, Theodoret: , , , , Starke: It is difficult for a timid and sorrowful heart to appropriate to itself the Divine comfort; wherefore God sometimes calls them by name; cf. Act 10:31.
On Dan 10:13, Jerome (see supra, on that passage).Melancthon: Angelus pius narrat Danieli, se dimicasse cum principe Persarum, i.e., cum diabolo moliente dissipationes regni Persici. Etsi enim ignoramus, quomodo inter se pugnent boni et mali spiritus, tamen certamina esse non dubium est, sive disputatione fiant, sive aliis modis. Ait ergo bonus Angelus repressum a se esse malum spiritum, qui Cambysen juvenem et aulicos impios incitabat, vel ad delendam gentem Judaicam, vel ad interficiendum Danielem, vel ad alias malas actiones tentandas, qu novos motus in regno allatur erant.Auberlen, Blumhardt, Fller (see supra, No. 2).
On Dan 10:15 et seq., Starke: If needless terror and alarm can deprive a pious soul of his speech, is it a wonder that wicked persons shall be dumb when Christ addresses them with the words, Friend, how camest thou in hither, etc.? (Mat 22:12).If God does not first open our lips, either directly or indirectly, we shall be unable to speak what pleases Him (Rom 8:26; Rom 10:15).
On Dan 10:20 et seq., Melancthon: Hc exempla ostendunt satis inquietam fuisse provinciam: Fuerunt igitur et angelorum certamina, qui malos spiritus, seditionum et discordiarum inflammatores depellebant.Starke: When one kingdom of the world has been destroyed, Satan will reign through another; and thus the church is compelled to contend constantly against the prince of this world, until all kingdoms shall belong to God and Christ.The fact that the power of angels is limited appears from their requiring the assistance of others.
Footnotes:
[1] here signifies continued.
[2]The phrase is peculiar, , literally, sevens days, the latter being in epexegetical apposition. It is here used in contrast with Dan 9:25 et seq., to show that literal weeks, and not hebdomades of years, are intended.]
[3][We have repeatedly objected to this hypothesis of a later interpolation as purely subjective and gratuitous.]
[4][That the prophecies in question are unique in this particular may readily be conceded without any impeachment of their genuineness. The whole book is remarkable for its vividness and personality of delineation. The details were so striking that Cyrus the Great and Alexander the Great are traditionally reported to have recognized their own portraits immediately. But the same is measurably true of other specifications in O.-T. prophecies, although not on so extended a scale. Even the name of Cyrus is mentioned by Isaiah nearly two centuries before his time; yet few, among evangelical interpreters at least, would on that account pronounce those passages a forgery. The authors reasoning for the rejection of the authenticity of these predictions of Daniel is entirely uncritical. Hengstenberg. in his work on the Genuineness of the Book of Daniel (Edinb. translation, sec. XII), adduces other examples of equal definiteness in O.-T. prophecy, and meets this whole objection fully. The vague manner in which our author adduces the argument gives very little opportunity to do more than make this general demurral to his views on this point.]
[5][Keil takes a different view of this whole prophecy, with a view to obviate any sudden transition, either from the Persian monarchy to the Antiochian tyranny, or from that to the final consummation of the kingdom of God. The angel of the Lord will reveal to Daniel, not what shall happen from the third year of Cyrus to the time of Antiochus, and further to the resurrection of the dead, but, according to the express declaration of Dan 10:14, what shall happen to his people , i.e., in the Messianic future, because the prophecy relates to this time. In the takes place the destruction of the world-power, and the setting up of the Messianic kingdom at the end of the present world-on. All that the angel says regarding the Persian and the Javanic world-kingdoms, and the wars of the kings of the north and the south, has its aim to the end-time, and serves only to indicate briefly the chief elements of the development of the world-kingdoms till the time when the war that brings in the end shall burst forth, and to show how, after the overthrow of the Javanic world-kingdom, neither the kings of the north nor those of the south shall gain the possession of the dominion of the world. But this last would certainly seem to be a very inadequate reason for so great a detail of political delineation. Hence, after pursuing the exposition of the middle portion of this prophecy especially, Keil concludes thus: From this comparison this much follows, that the prophecy does not furnish a prediction of the historical wars of the Seleucid and the Ptolemies, but an ideal description of the war of the kings of the north and the south in its general outlines, whereby, it is true, diverse special elements of the prophetical announcement have been historically fulfilled, but the historical reality does not correspond with the contents of the prophecy in anything like an exhaustive manner. Accordingly he everywhere exaggerates the minor discrepancies that occur between the prophecy and the history of Antiochus in particular, with a view to enhance this idealistic theory. The indefiniteness and inconsistency of thus carrying on at once a double line of interpretation renders his scheme on the whole very unsatisfactory. Yet it is in pursuance of his general theory concerning the absence of a design on the prophets part to particularize the history or the Jews as such. To a certain point this theory is doubtless true; but he carries it so far as to render the predictions rather symbolical than real. The discrepancies upon which he chiefly relies for the support of his view we will examine in detail as they occur.]
[6][On the contrary, the fact that in chap. 11 this detail is so minutely drawn out, is a strong proof of the genuineness of this portion, for it is precisely here that the same archenemy, the Antiochian antichrist, is most vividly depicted, who constitutes the prominent and culminating figure in all the preceding visions. The whole chapter evidently revolves around this, which is likewise the central point of the entire book. It is moreover in exact conformity with the spirit of O.-T. prophecy to dwell thus at length upon the nearest type of all the tableaux in the future of Gods people, and to touch more lightly and dimly upon the more distant features.]
[7][Keil, however, agrees with Gesenius and Frst in regarding it as an anomalous third pers. masc. prter.]
[8][In these phrases is doubtless, as Gesenius explains, to be regarded as an accusative of limitation, the preceding noun being in the absolute, and not the construct state. Yet even this appositional relation seems to limit the , whether the latter be regarded as a noun=weeks or even simple=seven, to the usual hebdomadal sense. It thus stands really, though perhaps not intentionally, in contrast with the undefined of Dan 9:24-27, and leaves the word in that passage to be interpreted by the exigencies of the context.]
[9][But this contrast is not well founded, for the (unleavened cakes) of the Passover was not (notwithstanding Deu 16:3) bread of sorrow, but pure, holy bread, which Daniel did not eat, in opposition to the law, for three weeks. is not to be limited to bread in its narrower sense, but denotes food generally.Keil.]
[10][The predominant opinion, nevertheless, among scholars identifies Ophir with Uphaz.]
[11][Keil, however contends that , place of feet, does not stand for feet, but denotes that part of the human frame where the feet are; and the word indicates that not the feet alone, but the under parts of the body shone like burnished brass.]
[12][Keil thinks that the voice was not heard till after Daniels companions had fied; but this is by no means certain from the text.]
[13]Cf. especially Fller on this passage, p. Dan 274: The question is, which of the two spirits shall succeed in exercising the greater influence over the Persian court and king. It becomes an object to gain the consent of the Persian king and the holders of power under him, that he may decide thus or otherwise. It is conceivable that in such a case the good spirit, who operated on the world-ruler, would occupy a more difficult position, and be engaged in a harder task than the evil spirit, to whom the heart of the natural man, to say nothing of the heart of a heathen, is more accessible than it is to the former. It was then that Michael came to his support by causing, as Hofmann remarks (as above, p. 288), the relations which Cyrus had assumed toward the Jewish people to operate on that king, and to gain increased influence over his inclinations and views, etc.
[14][Yet we must not, with Kranichfeld, supply the clause, to another more extensive conflict, because this supplement is arbitrary; but rather, with Kliefoth, interpret the word generally, as it stands, of the going out of the angel to fight for the people of God, without excluding the war with the prince of Persia, or limiting it to this war (Keil).]
[15][The vagueness and indecision of this interpretation of the prince in question is no less an objection to it than its evidently heathenish character. The authors arguments adduced above against the common view which identifies this angelic prince with Christ himself are entirely inconclusive: for (1) Jesus likewise calls himself a messenger of God (Joh 3:17; Joh 3:34); (2) the Son of God himself did not disdain angelic aid (Mat 4:11; Luk 22:43); (3) the other O.T. instances cited (especially Jos 5:14) are clearly allusions to the Messianic theophany. This heavenly form has thus, it is true, the shining white talar common to the angel. Eze 9:9, but all the other features, as predescribedthe shining of the body, the brightness of his countenance, his eyes like a lamp of fire, arms and feet like glittering brass, the sound of his speakingall these point to the revelation of the , the glorious appearance of the Lord, Ezekiel 1, and teach us that the seen by Daniel was no common angel-prince, but a manifestation of Jehovah, i.e., the Logos. This is placed beyond a doubt by a comparison with Rev 1:13-15, where the form of the Son of man, whom John saw walking in the midst of the golden candlesticks, is described like the glorious appearance seen by Ezekiel and Daniel (Keil).]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
We are here introduced into the acquaintance of another vision of the Prophet’s. Daniel is observing a long and solemn fast, when he is suddenly visited by One, who appeared in great glory. The Prophet being exceedingly troubled in the view of the vision, is comforted by an angel.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
It appears from the date of this vision, that it was about two years after the former. The Lord was about to do great things for his Church, and therefore, was thus preparing the minds both of Prophet and people for his mercies. We have an account of Daniel’s long fasting. Oh! for grace to mortify the body by the Spirit, that we may live! Rom 8:11 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Divine Appointments
Dan 10:1
All things are appointed. Yet it pleases our little vanity to imagine that we appoint some things ourselves. Oh the fuss of the world, and the noise, and the fruitlessness! We have deposed God from being husbandman, and have taken to growing crops of our own kind. They always fail.
The appointing God is on the throne; the Lord reigneth, let the earth rejoice.
It is interesting to me as a student of the Book to see in how many aspects Divine appointment is presented in the Holy Scriptures. God has taken everything under His own care; He has allowed no one little inch of His great creation to bear any name but His own.
Let us look at some of the instances in which the Divine appointment appears as the central thought. ‘Is there not an appointed time to man upon earth?’ (Job 7:1 ). Job found that out by sorrow.
I. Sorrow is one of the head-masters in God’s school; it is the costliest department of the great school of God, is the department of sorrow. To think of it all: the child’s little face all bloom waiting the sharp chisel and the heavy mallet of the sculptor. It is so that we learn really where we are, and what we are, and what we should be, and what we should do. He who made man appoints his time; all our days are in God. He never shows us tomorrow; He might do that. No, therein is the sovereignty of God. This is Sunday; might not God show us now, getting on to midday, just one gleam of Monday? Never! Monday is where God is; the future is as invisible and as incomprehensible as God. Men do not think of that. They chaffer about tomorrow as if they owned it.
II. Sometimes the appointments of God are associated with high joys, with royal feast and plenteous-ness, and the wine in which there is no drunkenness. So in Psa 81:3 , I read, ‘Blow up the trumpet… in the time appointed’. It would be a poor world without the trumpet and all that the trumpet means. The trumpet means victory, progress, thankfulness, courage, and an enemy beaten and blown off. So there is an appointed time for bright joy to come and take up the trumpet and blow a blast that will be music in the ear of God. The world shall not always be sunless. We live in these high promises; these are the vaticinations that make the future tolerable; but for such prophetic outlook and forecast who dare pray that he may awake tomorrow? God has filled His book with trumpets and shawms and cymbals and dances, and sometimes the Church even now goes wild with holy ecstasy. There is great danger in that, however, because only the ecstatic can understand ecstasy, and only those who were born full of red blood can enter into Pentecostal thunder and fury and anthem.
III. Then we come to another view in Dan 10:1 : ‘The thing was true, but the time appointed was long’. What does it matter about the time if we have got the truth? Mark these wonderful words: ‘The thing was true’ that is the point to stop at ‘but the time was long’. A century is nothing to those who have the truth and hold it for man and God. God counts time in His own way. He does not listen to the tick of our poor pendulum; a man might stop that, a little child could stop the pendulum, but not the time, not the evolution, not the certainty of the final point.
IV. The old saints were trained by waiting. Habakkuk was; he says, ‘The vision is yet for an appointed time… wait for it’ (Hab 2:3 ). Can we go further Today than this grand prophecy? Is not this one sentence a great philosophy of history and of time and of divinity? The vision was for an appointed time. If the Lord has said, ‘I will wait,’ that is enough for me; I do not ask when, nor do I ask how; He has defined my function, He says in one pregnant injunction, ‘Wait for it’. Beware, however, of intellectual or spiritual indolence; it is not a question of turning your back upon the Divine word, and saying, ‘Let it come, then, according to some Divine appointment,’ but waiting is worshipping, waiting is hoping, waiting is praying. Do not imagine that we are remitted to a sleepy slumberous ministry of inertness or inactivity in any shape or in any degree. The highest expression of power is repose; the highest expression of energy is standing still under Divine conditions and according to the movement of the Divine inspiration.
Joseph Parker, City Temple Pulpit, vol. vi. p. 19.
Dan 10:1
Then suddenly would come a dream of far different character a tumultuous dream commencing with a music such as now I often heard in sleep music of preparation and of awakening suspense. The morning was come of a mighty day a day of crisis and of ultimate hope for human nature, then suffering mysterious eclipse, and labouring in some dread extremity. Somewhere, but I knew not where somehow, but I knew not how by some beings, but I knew not by whom a battle, a strife, an agony, was travelling through all its stages was evolving itself, like the catastrophe of some mighty drama, with which my sympathy was the more insupportable, from deepening confusion as to its local scene, its cause, its nature, and its undecipherable issue…. Some greater interest was at stake, some mightier cause, than ever yet the sword had pleaded, or trumpet had proclaimed. Then came sudden alarms; hurryings to and fro, trepidations of innumerable fugitives; I knew not whether from the good cause or the bad; darkness and lights; tempest and human faces.
De Quincey, Confessions of an English Opium-Eater.
Reference X. 1. J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons (7th Series), p. 174.
The Unseen Vision
Dan 10:7
Cyrus had been King of Babylon three years when the revelation was vouchsafed to Daniel. He had a vision of the eternal Son. And so overpowering in its glory was it all that the comeliness of Daniel was turned into corruption, and he retained no strength.
I. The circumstances at once suggest that vision is not conditioned by locality. Daniel and his friends; were all in company, but ‘I Daniel alone saw the vision’. The same thing meets us in life on every hand; set down a poet on any spot on earth and he will enmantle it with gold and glory, and have his vision in it of all lovely things.
II. The same thing is very true of pioneers in social reform. Picture the first poor homeless waif who arrested the gaze of a Dr. Barnardo. Many an eye had glanced at him that night; some had bidden him move on, and some had pitied him; but ‘I Daniel alone saw the vision,’ a vision of that boy clothed and redeemed; a vision of the boy out on the fields of Canada, with the sunshine on his cheek. All great movements for bettering mankind have begun not in a brain that schemed, but in a heart that saw.
III. This, too, is preeminently true of Christ. If He was separated from His race by being sinless, He was separated not less by what He saw. He saw such heights and depths and undiscovered glories that, matched with His, the keenest eyes are blind.
IV. There is another suggestion in the words; it is that the secret of vision lies in character. Why did these men who were with Daniel see nothing of the glory in the heavens?
a. They were not on the path of duty. It was such a smooth and easy life in Babylon that they shirked the toil and the hardship of return. Daniel was there because God willed it so.
b. They did not see the vision because they felt not the burden and sorrow of Israel. That burden had wellnigh broken Daniel’s heart, but there is no sign that it troubled them at all. Must there not always be a preparation of that kind if we are to see the vision of Christ Jesus? The man who has seen the depths of his own heart, and knows how tangled are the roots of evil, is ready for the appearing of the Lord.
G. H. Morrison, The Wings of the Morning, p. 145.
Dan 10:8
It takes solitude to get yourself saturated by any thought, and to the great majority of men even solitude will not effect it, but only lower their thinking power to the congealing point. Nevertheless, as Mr. Darwin saw in relation to the growth and decay of species, the very condition which kills out a weak thinking power, feeds and elevates to the glowing point a strong thinking power…. Till the life of a thought becomes identical with the life of an emotion, it will never really dominate the minds of men. And so far as I can judge by history, this result is never attained for thought, without long, solitary brooding over it.
R. H. Hutton.
Dan 10:11
And as I walked towards the jail, the word of the Lord came to me, saying, ‘My love was always to thee, and thou art in My love’. And I was ravished with the sense of the love of God, and greatly strengthened in my inward man. But when I came into the jail, where the prisoners were, a great power of darkness struck at me, and I sat still, having my spirit gathered into the love of God.
Fox’s Journal, 1649.
Dan 10:11
Do you know, more people perish from lack of proper self-appreciation than from consumption.
Maxim Gorky.
Reference. X. 11. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxviii. No. 2256.
Dan 10:12
It is strange to say, but it is a truth which our own observation and experience will confirm, that when a man discerns in himself most sin and humbles himself most, when his comeliness seems to him to vanish away and all his graces to wither, when he feels disgust at himself, and revolts at the thought of himself seems to himself all dust and ashes, all foulness and odiousness, then it is that he is really rising in the kingdom of God, as it is said of Daniel, ‘From the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words ‘.
Newman.
See Dora Greenwell’s Covenant of Life, pp. 134 f.
The Practical Difficulty of Prayer
Dan 10:17
Daniel’s difficulty is our difficulty. How can we talk with our Lord? That is the perpetual problem. It is not that prayer is impossible, or that we are unwilling to pray; it is that ‘we know not how to pray as we ought’.
I. Let us contemplate the inquiry.
a. What was the actual motive in the case before us. It was the sense of ignorance. ‘This my lord ‘was mysterious and overwhelming to Daniel. If Daniel had known this ‘Lord’ more fully he could have talked with Him, but ignorance gives him a stammering tongue: ignorance almost seals his lips. That is often our difficulty in prayer.
b. Reverence moulded Daniel’s inquiry. See t repeated ‘my lord’. Shall the servant utter flue familiarities to the Lord? Nay verily. That, too, is our difficulty in prayer. Divineness arrests our presumption.
c. The sense of sin prompted Daniel’s cry. He felt the awful disparity between himself and the Lord to whom he spoke. To talk with One holy, harmless, and undefiled seemed impossible. Penitence arrests speech. Sinners realize the incongruity of talking with their Lord.
d. Forgetfulness of former answers to prayer often lies at the root of this inquiry. We deem prayer beyond us, because we do not recall what it has wrought for us in the past. ‘They soon forget’ is true of God’s Israel Today as of Israel in the olden day.
e. Lack of spiritual aspiration sometimes explains this inquiry. Bishop Creighton said that the greatest danger of the twentieth century would be ‘the absence of high aspirations’. It is an ever-present danger with us all. And it works fatally in the world of prayer.
II. Let us suggest response to the inquiry. The practical difficulty of prayer has been abundantly resolved in Christian experience.
a. Recollect the Lord’s love. Love can be talked with, though it be ‘lord’. Love is approachable, even when Divine. Love is full of sympathy, and sympathy delights to hearken when need tells its story. Could we but realize the loving sympathy of Christ we should know how to pray. He is always accessible. He desires us to talk with Him.
b. Remember the Lord’s promises. The servant can talk with the Lord when the promises of the Lord shine before his gladdened eyes. John Bunyan spoke of ‘leaping into the bosom of the promise’. They find a tranquil refuge who do so. The Bible is one colossal promise to the praying soul.
c. Plead His atonement. The greatest secret of successful prayer is an evangelical secret. To multitudes of supplicants prayer would be an insuperable difficulty were it not that they have recourse to the sacrifice Christ offered on Calvary. The cross solves the riddle of prayer. Surrender the substitutionary sacrifice, and you lose the key of prayer. Many a prayer is sore labour and ineffectual labour, because it is not bedewed with Jesus’ blood.
d. Expect the help of the Holy Spirit. We sadly multiply the practical hindrances to prayer because we so ignore the work of the Holy Spirit.
e. Bethink you of the evil of restraining prayer. How you reflect on God His veracity and His fidelity by so doing. Base, too, is the ingratitude of suppressing prayer. Says John Pulsford, that noble mystic, ‘sow your prayers into the heart of God’.
Dinsdale T. Young, The Enthusiasm of God, p. 192.
References. X. 18. G. Mulligan, Comradeship and Character, p. 173. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxii. No. 1295. X. 18, 19. Archbishop Benson, ‘Boy Life,’ Sundays in Wellington College, p. 219. X. 19. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xix. No. 1089.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
The True Majority
Dan 10:21
Michael was known amongst the ancient Jews as the angel or prince who had special charge of the nation of Israel. The very best Jewish writers concur in teaching that the name “Michael” is the same as the title “Messiah.” It is held by them that the few passages in which he is referred to can be most satisfactorily explained on this supposition. The man speaking in the text was “a certain man clothed in linen, whose loins were girded with fine gold of Uphaz. His body also was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude” ( Dan 10:5-6 ). This is the dazzling and nameless personage that has appealed to the religious imagination through all the known centuries of time. One day not one of earth’s cold, grey days, but a day of brighter cast we shall see that Personage, and name him, and thank him for the tender veiling of a light that might have struck creation blind.
The text invites us to look at the astonishing fact that the speakers of truth have always been in a minority, and that the quality of that minority has given it the dignity and force of a majority. “There is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.” Granted that a statement is true, and surely there can be nothing more astonishing than that it should array against itself the majority of mankind. We might not hesitate to say, All beauty will be admired; All excellence will be imitated; All divinity will be adored. These would seem to be but commonplaces. No argument is needed to enforce them. You have but to state the transparent propositions, and the applauding world will accept them. Now this, which appears to be so simple, and so certain, is contradicted by the almost unanimous verdict of history. Take, for example, the proposition All beauty will be admired, or, All excellence will be imitated, or, All divinity will be adored. First of all, there is an intellectual difficulty, for the man who hears the proposition will instantly say, What is beauty? What is excellence? What is divinity? Thus the ground is changed from the practical to the metaphysical. Did any two opinions ever exactly coincide and constitute a perfect agreement? The moment we come into the region of opinion we come into the region of difference. Opinions always separate men sooner or later; even when they appear to unite men it is upon a very temporary and fickle basis. There may be a large agreement, or almost agreement, or practical agreement, or agreement for purposes of expedience and convenience; but real and absolute agreement in every point and sentiment would seem to be impossible, may we not say happily? impossible, having in view the education of the world on a large and complete scale. But where the intellectual difficulty may be overcome the moral difficulty is most stubborn. For example, admiration ought to mean imitation, imitation ought to mean discipline, and adoration ought to be translated into self-suppression. To say that you admire beauty, and yet to remain unbeautiful, is more than a contradiction in terms it is a practical and reprehensible irony. To profess to reverence a certain quality of character, and yet to live under conditions which minister to a precisely opposite quality of being, is surely an unintelligible and practical blasphemy. Then there is a social difficulty, which ought to be taken into account in our estimate of this whole matter. To break away, to be singular, to stand aloof, to speak an unpopular language, who does not shrink from such conspicuousness? and who does not call such cowardice modesty? The most astounding fact is that men can look on beauty and think evil thoughts in its sacred presence; men can go from the holy atmosphere of the altar and drink the poison-cups of perdition; men can bow their heads as if in prayer, and raise them as if they had been scorched by baleful fire. This is the mystery of human nature! This is the enigma of the heart! This is the infinite perplexity which needed the equal mystery of the Cross to counter-work its subtlety and undo its fearful shame!
There stands, then, the appalling, and as one would suppose the unintelligible, fact that men may see the good and yet pursue the wrong, and that if right and wrong were put to the vote today the cause of the wrong would be carried by an overwhelming numerical majority. When the religions of the world are tabulated, and the nominal adherents of each religion are set forth in arithmetical forms, it is found that Jesus Christ is at the foot of the list! This is simply incredible from the point of view of imagination. This would indeed seem to be a disproof of the Messiahship of Christ, for surely none could come from heaven, and work the right miracles, and speak the right words, without instantly touching the heart of the world and securing the allegiance of all ages and lands. All this would constitute an almost insuperable difficulty in the way of Christianity did we not see the selfsame thing in relation to other things which are divested of all theological mystery. Take the case of temperance, cleanliness, self-culture, honesty, or any of the common and palpable virtues, and it will be found that the same argument relates to them, so that if the argument proves anything in regard to Christianity it proves too much; for it would destroy the very idea that virtue is possible, and that society can be organised upon lines of righteousness and truthfulness. As a matter of fact, it would probably be found that the majority of men are today on the side of false-speaking. Even when they speak the truth in considerable degree, they may mar the whole statement by some hidden falsehood of thought, which never comes into the openness of audible speech. If, therefore, we give up Christianity on the ground of majorities of a numerical kind, we must give up every namable virtue; but as we cannot give up every namable virtue, neither can we give up Christianity on the mere ground that the overwhelming majority of mankind are opposed to the Cross of Christ. What, then, is our consolation? what is our hope?
Notwithstanding the majority of evil as to mere number, the quality of the minority has outweighed its influence, and given assurance of its ultimate extinction. “There is none that holdeth with me in all these things, but Michael your prince.” This is a grand “but.” It points indeed to the true majority, a majority not of number, and not for the present, but a majority of quality and a majority for the future. It was upon this principle that the Apostles always operated, and by this doctrine they were continually and abundantly sustained. Even in the darkest days they comforted themselves with the assurance “He that is with us is more than all that can be against us.” “Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea, rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.” The Apostle Paul knew that he was in a numerical minority, yet he lifted up his voice in passionate appeal, saying, “Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?… Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.” The Apostle knew that the present was full of grievousness and bitter disappointment, yet he knew also that the present was quite measurable, but for a few moments or years at the most, and would soon pass away, never more to be remembered. “Our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory.” The Church cannot fail, simply because Christ cannot fail. “Who is he that overcometh the world but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?” “Thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.” “He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied.” The Apostles and Christian teachers of all ages have comforted themselves in all weakness and fear by knowing that the triumph of Jesus Christ was assured. “He hath clothed me with the garments of salvation; he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness.” When Jesus Christ “ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.” He is our Leader, and in him we have all things pertaining to life and godliness, and in him is laid up the certainty of our victory as followers of the Cross. “Let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.” “He was crucified through weakness, yet he liveth by the power of God.” “He humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross, wherefore God hath also highly exalted him and given him a name which is above every name.” When the seer, in the book of Revelation, beheld the opened heavens, he saw One there on whose head were many crowns; yea, he saw the Lamb, and was assured that he was the Lord of lords and the King of kings.
All this may seem to be of the nature of religious fancy; but here again we establish ourselves by analogies of a historical kind, which cannot be denied, so patent are they, and so overwhelming in the evidence by which they are sustained. Suppose a young composer of music should say, The world has rejected my compositions; there is no sale for my books; there is only one man who has uttered a word of promise or comfort to me: there is none that stands by me in all these endeavours but Beethoven! What a noble “but”! The very singularity of the exception creates a majority in the young man’s favour. Where Beethoven has contributed his signature it is of but little consequence what the rest of the world may have done as to the merit of the music which has been submitted for criticism. Suppose a young painter should say, There is none that supports me in the view I have taken of my art but one; all my fellow-students are against me; all rivals hold me in contempt; the public is blind to any merits which I may persuade myself I possess: there is none that holdeth with me in this matter of art but Raphael! Here again is the majority. Hamlet tells us that the praise of such an one is worth a whole theatre of others. This is the great principle on which we are now insisting, namely, that there may be a majority of quality when there is not a majority of number. All these are but dim suggestions as to the glory of the text; they are as if we were lighting a lamp to show the width of the firmament. The speech of the Church is I know that I am despised and rejected; I know that my bodily presence is often weak and my speech contemptible; I know that I have but little chance of being heard amid the clamour and fury of an excited world: there is none that holdeth with me in this great plan of evangelisation and redemption but the Son of God, the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End. This also is the speech of truth: I am thrown down in the streets; I am not allowed to make my statement; all my pleas are carried away in a whirlwind of disapprobation and contempt: there is none that thinketh with me in this matter of reality, equity, probity, and innermost pureness of heart, but the living God, the Eternal Father, the almighty Jehovah.
But what a glorious majority is this supposed minority! “If God be for us, who can be against us?” There can be no permanent success against truth, wherever you find it truth in building; truth in promises; truth in prediction; truth in friendship. At last the truth prevails over all things, and stands in glory when night has overwhelmed every form and claim of falsehood. In calling men to unite themselves to the Christian cause I call them to enlist with the majority. It cannot be denied that the majority of number has great fascination for minds which are but partially enlightened or educated. It is easy to go with a multitude to do evil, and it is easy to sanctify the deeds of the multitude by the sophistical proverb that the voice of the people is the voice of God. A perverted proverb may do more harm to the opening minds of a generation than could be done by the most elaborate processes of reasoning. Lay it down as a fundamental principle that right must prevail, that truth must conquer, simply because God lives and his throne is established in the universe. Appearances are against us. “Strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it”; “Wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat.” Here we come upon the terms “few” and “many” terms of mere number. But those who enter by the strait gate follow the Son of God; their strength is in his omnipotence, and their conquest is assured by his triumph. O Church of the living God, few in number, small in resources, contemned amongst the organisations of the earth, comfort thyself with the truth that thy majority is one of quality, and that in the long run quality prevails over number, subduing all things to itself and permeating all things with the richness and vitality of its own nature. “Why art thou cast down, O my soul, and why art thou disquieted within me? Hope thou in God, for I shall yet praise him, who is the health of my countenance and my God.” “Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem.” The day of wickedness, however gorgeous and dazzling may have been its apparent triumphs, hastens to darkness and night; the day of goodness hastens on to still fuller glory, and banishes night, and enlarges itself into the splendours of eternity.
Prayer
We will sing aloud of thy goodness, our Father in heaven, made known unto us by thy Son Jesus Christ our Saviour. We cannot deny thee; our own hearts would cry out aloud against us if we did not name thee aloud in adoring psalms. Thou hast made us, and not we ourselves; we have nothing that we have not received; yet we feel within us the movement of thy Spirit, aspirations not of our own creating, desires which testify to a ministry of which thou alone art the Author. We are not satisfied with time and sense; we feel that when we have thrown our arms around all possible acquisitions we have nothing but poverty; we are only satisfied with the living God. Knowing thee, loving thee, as thou art revealed in the Cross of Christ, we have all things, yea we abound in riches, and we call the riches of Christ unsearchable. We bless thee for many an experience of ecstasy which has not ended in itself, but which has enabled us to come down to the practical work and the actual suffering of life to do the one and endure the other with heroic strength, with tender patience. These are the gifts of the Holy Ghost: strength is thine, patience is the miracle which thou dost work in the impetuous human will; we magnify thee, we glorify thee, for any little strength we have ever had, for any little patience we have ever shown. Increase thy work within us; we feel how much thou hast yet to possess of this wondrous nature with which thou hast blessed us; thou hast not wholly conquered all the land of our life; the enemy is lurking behind many a fence: the foe is looking on and is ready to spring if we relax our attention for one moment. Lord, save us, or we perish; Christ of Calvary, die for us every day, and live for us again in our holiest consciousness, or we shall lose what little faith we have and fall into eternal darkness. Having begun a good work in us, thou wilt not abandon it; thou dost know the end from the beginning; surely thou wilt not throw thy comforts away upon our souls; they are meant for nourishment and stimulus and strengthening; may we receive them according to their purpose, and magnify God by their results in our life. Oh that we had hearkened unto thy law, and that we had kept thy commandments! for then our peace had flowed like a river, and our righteousness had been as the waves of the sea. Yet how little we are, and poor and mean; how narrow our conceptions; how wanting in courage and valour and sacrifice all the life we lead; how we seek ourselves rather than humanity; how we follow the instinct of our own vanity rather than carry the heavy cross to Golgotha that we may die upon it. Is there no release from this prison? Is there no liberty for us poor captives? Or are we to blame ourselves for the dungeons in which we live? Ought we not to charge back upon our own soul the accusation of guilt on this account? Verily we have enclosed ourselves in little places and within narrow conceptions; thou art not the Creator of these prisons, or the Author of these poor dim twilight views; thou art the God of the universe, the Lord of liberty. If we now confess our sins, wilt thou not forgive us our sins? If we now cry for larger spaces and fuller spiritual delights, wilt thou say “No” to the petitions thou hast inspired? Thou canst not deny thyself; thou wilt not leave thine own prayers without answer: Lord, make the prayer, and the prayer shall be its own reply. Comfort us according to the necessity of our life. Darkness falls suddenly upon us; thou dost not give us the advantage of twilight; darkness falls upon noon like a sudden judgment, and the shining of the sun is cut off in the midst of its strength: others thou dost lead by a long weary way down to the cold valley; we know not how thou dost establish this difference, but we behold it with our eyes, and wonder is awakened within us when we see the swift-falling sword and see the long-continued agony. Help us to believe that all things work together for good to them that love God; help us to cast ourselves wholly upon thee, and say, The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away: it is the Lord, let him do what seemeth good in his sight; he taketh one from my side today, and he will call for me tomorrow, and on the third day we shall forget the period of separation. Speak comfortably to thy people, and add to the mystery of redemption the mystery of consolation. Pity us in our weakness and manifold littleness. Thou knowest how our faces burn with shame when we are alone with thee. Pardon our guilt; it would darken every line of the sky if from the Cross of Christ thy Son there did not flame forth a light above the brightness of the sun. Amen.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
VI
THE RELATED PROPHETIC SECTIONS OF DANIEL
Having completed the historical sections of this book, we now consider the related prophetic sections. It is here we find the crux of the opposition of the atheistic critics. Their presupposition is: There can be no prophecy in any supernatural sense. Therefore they refuse to see any reference in the book to matters beyond the times of Antiochus Epiphanes. He to them is the culmination of the book. The unknown writer, as they claimed, lived after his times, and cast well-known history into the form of prophecy, attributing its authorship, through a license accorded to writers of novels, to a fictitious Daniel supposed to be living in the period between Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus.
A complete answer to both their premise and conclusion would be the proof of even one real prediction in the book, fulfilled after their own assigned date for the author. Any one who really believes the New Testament will find that proof in the words of our Lord: “When therefore ye see the abomination of desolation which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the Holy Place (let him that readeth understand) then let them that are in Judea flee to the mountains.”
But as our purpose it to expound the prophetic sections of this book, and not merely to reply to the contentions of atheists, we now take up our work. These are the prophetic sections:
1. Nebuchadnezzar’s first dream of the great and luminous image, or the five world empires (Dan 2:31-45 ).
2. Nebuchadnezzar’s second dream of the great tree, or what befell the great king of the first world empire (Dan 4:10-27 ).
3. The handwriting on the wall at Belshazzar’s feast, or what befell the last king of the first world empire and how the second empire comes to the front (Dan 5:25-28 ).
4. The vision of the four great beasts arising from the sea, representing in another form the four secular world empires and the enthronement of the King of the fifth world empire (Dan 7:1-28 ).
5. The vision of the ram and the he-goat, or the fortunes of the second and third world empires (Dan 8:1-27 ).
6. The seventy weeks, or the coming and sacrifice of the Messiah, the King of the fifth world empire (Dan 9:24-27 ).
7. The vision of the Son of man (Dan 10 ).
8. Revelation of the conflicts between two of the divisions of the third world empire) and the transition to the final advent of the Messiah, the King of the fifth world empire (Daniel 11-12).
On these eight prophetic sections let us give careful attention to the following observations:
OBSERVATIONS ON THE EIGHT PROPHECIES TAKEN TOGETHER
1. The most casual glance at this grouping of the several prophetic sections reveals both the unity of the book and the relation of its prophetic parts and the design of all.
2. Any man who looks carefully at this group and finds its culmination in Antiochus Epiphanes, a ruler of a fourth fragment of the third world empire, either is devoid of common sense and should receive the charity accorded to those unfortunates afflicted with mental aberration, or is so blinded with prejudice he cannot see. In the case of the latter alternative this much of Paul’s words apply: “If our gospel be hid, it is hid to them whom the god of this world has blinded lest they should see,” or our Lord’s words, “Having eyes they see not.” An unbiased child can see that the culmination of the book as to a person is in the King of the fifth world empire, and the culmination as to a fact is in the Messiah’s final advent for resurrection and judgment.
3. Following the characteristic Bible method and plan, secular governments in this book are considered only as they relate to the supremacy of the divine government and to the kingdom of God. All the rest concerning them is left in silence.
4. The relation between the parts of the prophecy is manifest throughout: The first prophecy is the basis of all the following sections. They only elaborate some detail concerning one or the other of the five world empires set forth in the first dream of Nebuchadnezzar, the four-pointed image and the conquering stone. For example, the first prophecy tells in general terms of four successive world empires to be followed by a fifth and spiritual world empire. The second and third sections of prophecy elaborate some details of the first great secular monarchy, telling us what befell its first and last king and the transition to the second monarchy. The fourth prophecy presents under different imagery the same five world empires, but gives some detail of every one not stated in the general terms of the first prophecy.
The fifth prophecy confines itself to details not before given of the second and third monarchies, how sovereignty passes from one to the other, how the third is dismembered, to prepare the way for the fourth, and how both are related to the kingdom of God. The sixth prophecy speaks only of the King of the fifth monarchy in his humiliation and sacrifice, as the third had spoken of his glory and exaltation, and the seventh is the vision of the Son of man.
The eighth deals only at first with the strifes between two of the parts of the dismembered third monarchy, incidentally alluding to the coming power of the fourth monarchy, glides, by easy transition, from the first antichrist, Antiochus, to a second antichrist in the far distant future, an antichrist already foreshown in the little horn of the fourth beast, and concludes with the final advent of the king of the fifth monarchy. No other book in all literature, sacred or profane, more clearly evidences greater unity, one consistent plan, more order in treatment, or a more glorious climax.
Of very great interest to us and to all who love God and his cause is the development of the messianic thought as the hope of the world. It concerns us much to fix in our minds this development.
The first prophecy tells of the divine origin and ultimate prevalence of Messiah’s kingdom.
The sixth tells of Messiah’s first advent in his humiliation and sacrifice.
The fourth tells of his exaltation and enthronement after the humiliation.
The eighth tells of his final advent for resurrection and judgment.
And so we need to note the coming of the first antichrist. Antiochus, in the little horn of the third beast (Dan 8:9 ) and the second antichrist in the little horn of the fourth beast (Dan 7:8 ) identical with John’s antichrist, (Rev 13:1-8 ) with its papal head (Rev 13:11-18 ). And so we find reference to the third antichrist in Dan 11:34-45 who is not the same as Paul’s man of sin. (2Th 2:8 and Rev 20:11 ), but this third antichrist comes at the beginning of the millennium and wages a conflict against the Jews, at which time they will be converted and the millennium will be ushered in. Daniel does not see Paul’s man of sin.
How clearly and with what precious comfort do all these prophecies reveal the supreme government of God over nations and men, the universal sweep of his providence, both general and special!
5. Finally how well we can understand, in the light of these great prophecies, the influence of the man and his book on all subsequent ages. His apocalyptic style and symbolism reappear in Zechariah’s visions, and form the greater part of the basis of John’s New Testament apocalypse. His Son of man creates a messianic title which our Lord adopts. His unique prophecy of the exact time of Messiah’s first advent creates a preparation in the hearts of the pious to expect him just then. We could not understand old Simeon at all if Daniel hadn’t fixed the time. Other prophets had foretold his lineage, the place of his birth, his great expiation and consequent enthronement, but no other showed just when he would come. His stress on “the kingdom of God and its certain coming and prevalence” put the titles of this divine government in the mouths of John the Baptist, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul. His sublime character as evidenced in his temperance, wisdom, incorruptible integrity, audacity of faith, indomitable courage, and inflexible devotion to God, has fired the hearts of a thousand orators and created a million heroes. His words have become the themes of a thousand pulpits. His righteous administration of public affairs has created a thousand reformers in politics and supplied the hope of all subsequent civic righteousness. “Dare to be a Daniel” has become the slogan of the ages.
His distinction between duty to the human government and duty to the divine government prepared the way for the reception of our Lord’s great dictum, “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s.” He laid the foundation of the doctrine that the state cannot intrude into the realm of conscience, and so was the pioneer, piloting a burdened world to its present great heritage of religious liberty. This man was not a reed shaken by the wind. He was no Reuben, unstable as water. We can’t even think about him without wanting to sing:
How firm a foundation, ye saints of the Lord,
is laid for your faith in his excellent word. Born in the reign of good Josiah, thy childhood remembering the finding of the lost book of Moses, thy youth passed in the great reformation and thy heart warmed in the mighty revival that followed, student of Jeremiah, prime minister of two world empires and beloved of God thou art a granite mountain, O Daniel, higher than Chimborazo, Mount Blanc or Dwa Walla Giri! Snarling little critics, like coyotes, may grabble their holes in the foot-hills that lean for support against thy solidity, but their yelping can never disturb thy calm serenity nor the dust they paw up can ever dim the eternal sunshine of the smiles of God that halo thy summit. SELECTED.
Having now considered these eight prophetic sections in group, let us give attention to their exposition in severalty.
NEBUCHADNEZZAR’S FIRST DREAM God’s sovereignty extends to men asleep as well as to men awake. Often his spirit has made revelation through dreams. Dreams of indigestion are chaotic, without form, plan, or coherence. But dreams sent by the Spirit awaken after-thought, appeal to the intelligence and vividly impress the dreamer. So Jacob’s dream at Bethel of the ladder reaching from earth to heaven, on which the angels of God ascended and descended, or Pharaoh’s dreams interpreted by Joseph, and the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar. No human system of psychology has ever explained the subtle and direct impact of Spirit on spirit. It is quite possible that there may have been some connection between Nebuchadnezzar’s waking thoughts and the dream which follows. We can at least conceive of previous reflections on his part full of questionings to which this dream would be a pertinent answer.
He may well have meditated upon the worldwide empire he had established and wondered if it would last, and if not what other government would succeed, and would it last. He may have pondered the causes of stability in human government, or the elements of decay and disintegration, and have wondered if human history would always be a record of the successive rising and falling of nations, or would the time ever come when the earth would know a universal and everlasting kingdom, and if so, who would be its author and what the principles of its perpetuity. Nebuchadnezzar was a truly great man, a thinker and organizer, and he was a pious man according to the requirements of his religion. So he may have been the waking subject of thoughts and questionings to which God sends an answer in a dream by night. Anyhow, he had the dream, and this was the dream: He saw a great and terrible image, a silent and luminous colossus in human form, standing upon the level Babylonian plain. Its several parts were strangely incongruous. The head was gold, the chest and arms were silver, the lower body and thighs were brass, the legs were iron, ending in feet with ten toes whose iron was mingled with clay.
Did this image reveal the highest attainment of human government and prophecy, its inevitable deterioration from gold to silver, from silver to brass, from brass to iron, from iron to crumbling clay? Or did it suggest a succession of governments, the first with the greatest unity and the greatest excellency, one head and that gold? The second dual in composition with its two arms, third commencing one, but dividing into two thighs, the fourth standing dual in it he saw a little stone cut out of a mountain without human hands, falling to the plain and intelligently rolling toward the image, and rolling gathering bulk and momentum until it smites the image on its feet of mixed iron and clay, overthrows it, crushes it, pulverizes it, and rolling on in resistless power, ever growing as it rolls, until it becomes a mountain in bulk and fills the whole earth. Such the dream.
THE INTERPRETATION OF THE DREAM The dream foretells five great world empires:
The first is identified as the Babylonian.
The second is identified in the prophecy as the Medo-Persian.
The third is identified in the prophecy as the Grecian.
The fourth by a suggestion in the eighth prophecy as the Roman.
The fifth is the kingdom of God set up by the God of heaven and without hands in the days of the fourth empire.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THESE EMPIRES This is the characteristic of the first: Thou, O king, art king of kings unto whom the God of heaven hath given the kingdom, the power, and the strength and the glory, and wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the birds of the heaven hath he given into thine hands and hath made thee to rule over them all, and thou art that head of gold.
The characteristic of the second one is, so far as this chapter tells us, that it is inferior to the first. This chapter, in identifying the second world monarchy, simply tells us that it succeeds the Babylonian, the first, but in the later prophetic sections when this vision is elaborated it is expressly said to be a kingdom of the Modes and of the Persians. I say that the book of Daniel identifies the second world government as the Medo-Persian Empire just as plainly and explicitly and exactly as it identifies the first with the Babylonian.
Now when we come to the third, “another third kingdom of brass which shall bear rule over all the earth,” is all this chapter says about this one, but when we take up the subsequent prophetic section it is explicitly said to be the Grecian Empire, the thighs indicating subsequent division of the empire. One man said to me, “If the third empire is unquestionably the Greek Empire, how can it be represented as the lower body and two thighs divided into four parts?” My answer is that this book tells us that it did divide into four parts, but deals only with the two parts which touched God’s people. This book has nothing in detail to say about the divisions of Alexander’s empire beyond the Seleucids and the Ptolemies, one of them getting Syria and the other getting Egypt.
When he comes to speak of the fourth this is what he says: And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things, and as iron that crusheth, all these shall it break in pieces and crush. Whereas, thou sawest the feet and the toes, a part of potter’s clay and part of iron, it shall be a divided kingdom. But there shall be in it of the strength of the iron forasmuch as thou sawest iron mixed with the miry clay, and as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so shall the kingdom be partly strong and partly broken; and whereas, thou sawest the iron mingled 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.
This book in this chapter does not name that fourth government, but when we come to consider the visions of the four beasts which is the same as this vision in another form, but with other details, we get a still clearer idea of the characteristics of this government; and when we come to chapter 2, when we are considering the last prophetic revelation, we have a suggestion where this fourth government comes in and holds Antiochus Epiphanes at bay, that place where the representative of Rome made a little circle in the sand around Antiochus and said, “You must answer before you step outside of that circle.” We know it also to be Rome because Rome with two legs divided into the Eastern and Western Empires, Constantine establishing Eastern Rome at Byzantium on the Bosporus while the Western Empire continues at Rome. We also know it by its divisions into ten kingdoms as its imperial supremacy passed away.
Here is what he says about the last kingdom:
1. He gives its origin: “I saw a little stone cut out without hands.” Those other four stood in the form of a man because man was the author of them all. This fifth one is divine, this fifth kingdom is set up by the God of heaven, and we should never lose sight of that fact.
2. The second thought that he presents is as to the time when the God of heaven would set up this kingdom; that it would be in the days of the fourth monarchy the Roman monarchy: “In the days of these kings will the God of heaven set up a kingdom.” So when a man asks when was the kingdom of heaven set up, and that, of course, means in its visible form, as the Babylonian kingdom was visible, the Medo-Persian kingdom was visible, the Greek kingdom was visible, the Roman kingdom was visible, and as God all the time had a spiritual kingdom, but now he is to set up a visible kingdom and it is to be just as visible as any of these others then, as a Baptist, I answer: Jesus set up the kingdom in his lifetime, as the Gospels abundantly show.
3. The third thought in this description of this kingdom is its beginning, its gradual progress, its prevalence over the whole earth, Just a pebble falling, and as it falls getting bigger, rolling, and as it rolls getting bigger, smiting these other governments, becoming a mountain, becoming as big as the world. And when we get to thinking about that progress of this kingdom, we should remember what our Lord said, that in its eternal working it is like leaven which a woman puts in three measures of meal and ultimately it leavens the whole lump; and when we think about its external development, it is like a grain of mustard seed which a man planted and it grew and grew and grew until it became a tree.
Whenever we hear a pessimist preaching an idea of a kingdom like a tadpole, that commences big at first and tapers to a very fine tail, getting smaller and smaller and worse and worse, then that is not the kingdom Daniel spoke of.
His kingdom commences small and gets bigger and bigger, and mightier and mightier, and I thank God that I don’t have to preach concerning a kingdom that is continually “petering out.” I am glad that I can preach a gospel that is growing in power and extending in domain and that has the promise of God that it shall fill the whole world and be everlasting. It always did give me the creeps to hear one of those pessimists. They get their ideas from an inexcusable misinterpretation of certain passages of the Scriptures.
I heard one of them say, “Doesn’t our Lord say in answer to the direct question, ‘Are there few that will be saved?’ that ‘Straight is the gate and narrow is the way and few there be that find if ?” I said, “Yes, but to whom did he say that?” To the Jews of his day, and then to prevent a misconstruction, while only a few Jews of his day would be saved, he says, “But I say unto you that many shall come from the east and the west and the north and the south and shall recline at the table with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob.” The thought reappears in Revelation where John sees the host of the redeemed. He introduces us first to 144,000 Jews and then he shows us a line that no man can see the end of: “I saw a great multitude that no man could number out of every nation and tribe and tongue and kindred.” So if the kingdom which Jesus Christ in the days of his flesh set up on this earth is narrowing, that is cause for sadness, but if it is spreading out, growing bigger and bigger, and has perpetuity, that is a cause for gladness.
This visible kingdom of Jesus Christ will be perpetual. Perpetuity is its heritage.
We need not be afraid to preach its perpetuity and its visibility, with visible subjects, with visible ordinances, with a visible church charged with its administration. It will not be sponged off the board, any of it, neither the kingdom nor its gospel nor its church nor its ordinances. They will stand until the rivers shall be emptied into the sea. As Dr. Burleson used to say: “It will be standing when grass quits growing, and we should not be afraid to preach perpetuity.” Let us not be too sure that we can take a surveying chain and trace that perpetuity through human agencies and human history, but we may certainly stand on the declaration of God’s Word that this kingdom is everlasting: Forasmuch as thou sawest that a stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that in the days of those kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor shall the sovereignty thereof be left to another people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.
Over and over again in this book, Daniel holds out, as he explains the thought of this first dream as a light that gets bigger and bigger and brighter and brighter, that the saints shall possess the kingdoms of the world.
I expect to see (in the flesh or out of the flesh it matters not ) every mountain of this earth or mountain range and every valley between and every plain, whether rich red land like the Panhandle or dry sand like the Sahara Desert; and every zone, Arctic, Temperate, or Torrid: every iceberg shivering in the Aurora Borealis around the North Pole or South Pole, have floating over it the great white conquering banner of the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.
We are to have every bit of it, and the time will come when no fallen angel will flap his wing and make a shadow on any part of it and when no wicked man shall crush beneath his feet any of its beautiful or sweet flowers, but when the meek shall inherit the earth, and throughout the whole earth, after its regeneration, there shall dwell eternal righteousness.
QUESTIONS
1. Give, in order, the prophetic sections of the book of Daniel.
2. Show the unity of the book from these sections.
3. Show the culmination of the book in person and fact.
4. In what respect only are secular governments considered in this book and throughout the Bible?
5. Show the relations of the prophetic sections to each other and how all the rest are developments of the first.
6. Give, in order, all the developments of the messianic thought.
7. Give the several antichrists, citing passages for each.
8. What great doctrine of special comfort do all these prophecies show?
9. Give particulars to show the influence of the man and the book on later ages.
10. Name the five world empires of Dan 2 .
11. What are the characteristics of the fifth, who its author and when set up?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
XII
THE GLORIOUS VISION OF THE SON OF GOD
Dan 10:1-21
This chapter begins the consideration of the seventh prophetic section of Daniel, Dan 10 . The theme of the chapter is the glorious vision of the Son of God. In the first discussion on Dan 9 we have seen the prophet in great distress because, though the seventy years of desolation foretold by Jeremiah were about ended, and though Cyrus, the deliverer, according to Isaiah, had come, yet Israel remained in captivity. In this chapter we find the prophet in great distress again, because, though Cyrus had issued his decree of restoration, and though a number of the exiles had returned, yet the work of restoration at Jerusalem was moving slowly, and in the midst of great opposition.
To get a clear view of the last section of the book of Daniel we must look at Dan 10 as a prologue; Dan 2 and three verses of Dan 12 as the prophecy, and the rest of Dan 12 as the epilogue.
The whole section of three chapters is a revelation concerning a great war which opens first in the spiritual world between contending angels, back of the nations, whose details are given in Dan 10 , and there opens on earth a war whose details are given in chapter II. The date is the third year of Cyrus, about the twenty-fourth day of the first month of the Jewish year, that is, the twenty-fourth day of Nisan.
The occasion is the great mourning, fasting, and prayer of Daniel lasting three weeks. How higher critics can object to this book on the ground that Daniel shows little interest in his countrymen is an amazing thing. When we study Dan 9 and see his very soul poured out to God in behalf of his people; when we look at him here for three weeks bowed down in mourning and prayer and in fasting on account of his people, we can’t have any respect for the objection of a higher critic.
The place is on the Tigris (Hiddekel), about sixty miles from Babylon, the Tigris and Euphrates being connected with a canal. I don’t know that Daniel went on the canal boat, but there was connection, in Daniel’s time and before his time, between these two rivers by a canal, just as the canal built by the Chicago people connecting the Chicago River with the Illinois, thus putting the waters of Lake Michigan and the Mississippi River in touch with each other. The Tigris is to Persia what the Euphrates was to Babylonia. Those present are Daniel and a few companions.
Since the prophecy in Dan 9 great events have occurred, but the results are so far disappointing. These events (that come in between Dan 9 and Dan 10 ) are:
The first event. The Cyrus decree, not only put in writing, but preserved in the archives where it was found by Darius Hystaspes many years later. (See Ezr 6:1-5 .) It is in the first chapter of Ezra:
Now in the first year of Cyrus, king of Persia, that the word of Jehovah by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, Jehovah stirred up the spirit of Cyrus, king of Persia, so that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing, saying. Thus saith Cyrus, king of Persia, All the kingdoms of the earth hath Jehovah, the God of heaven, given me; and he hath charged me to build him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Whosoever there is among you of all his people, his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and build the house of Jehovah, the God of Israel (he is God), which is in Jerusalem. And whosoever is left, in any place where he sojourneth, let the men of his place help him with silver, and with gold, and with goods, and with beasts, besides the free-will offering for the house of God which is in Jerusalem. Ezr 1:1-5 .
That is the first event. Upon that event, note this remark: We must not conclude too much from these words of Cyrus. While he is the servant of Jehovah even more than he knows, yet political rather than religious motives influenced him to issue this proclamation. We know from an inscription brought to light in 1879 that he was just as complimentary in his references to the heathen gods as to Jehovah. His policy was to leave all his subjects free to worship any god they chose, without state interference, and that is a grand policy. His further policy was to send back to their own places the captured idols or sacred vessels stored in Babylon by the preceding government, the one which he overthrew. This inscription, speaking of the various races dwelling between the Mediterranean Sea and Persian Gulf) reads as follows:
The gods who dwelt among them to their places I restored, and I assigned them a permanent habitation. All their pride I assembled, and I increased their property; and the gods of Sumin and Akkad whom Nabonidus had introduced at the festivals of the Lord of the gods at Kal-anna by the command of Merodach the great Lord, I assigned them an honorable seat in the sanctuaries, as was enjoyed by all the other gods in their own cities. And daily I prayed to Bel and Nebo that they would lengthen my days, and increase my good fortune, and would repeat to Merodach my Lord that “Thy worshipper, Cyrus, the king, and his son Cambyses, etc.”
This shows that Cyrus was a shrewd politician. He captured Babylon largely by claiming to be the friend of the imprisoned deities and priests that the Babylonians had gathered there from plundered nations, therefore a big crowd inside was in favor of his capturing Babylon, and when he got it he did send all these captured idols back home to their own places, as the allied armies when they defeated Bonaparte and captured Paris sent back the masterpieces of painting and sculpture appropriated by the French armies when they overran Italy and the other nations of the earth.
The second event. In response to his decree concerning the Jews, as we learn from the book of Ezra, only 42,600 Jews re-turned at that time. They were mainly of the tribe of Judah, but the record shows representatives of the tribes of Levi, Benjamin, Ephraim, and Manasseh. Of this number about one-tenth, 4,280, were priests. It speaks well for the priests that they were so large-ly represented, but there were only about 750 Levites, which is disparaging to them, as they constituted the bulk of the tribe of Levi. The civil leader was Zerubbabel, of the line of David, and the spiritual leader was Joshua, the high priest. It is noteworthy that on their return they make no attempt to restore the monarchy. Zerubbabel is only a governor, and subject to the Persian viceroy of Syria. A council of twelve men, chiefs of the fathers, including Zerubbabel and Joshua, constitute their civil government. It took them seven months merely to clear away the rubbish and get a level place for putting the Temple back on its old site, and so matters moved slowly. As the decree of restoration was in the first year of Cyrus, and this vision in his third year, we do not have to go far to find out the cause of Daniel’s mourning and fasting. He is grieving at the small number who were willing to return and restore Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple; he was grieving at the difficulties in the way of the returned exiles and the oppositions obstructing their progress. He couldn’t understand it, and so the first day of the first month of the Jewish year he begins to fast and pray. He prays two weeks, until the Passover comes, the fourteenth of Nisan, and gets no answer. He continues to pray through the week of the days of unleavened bread seven days more, making twenty-one days of mourning, fasting, and prayer. Let us observe the kind of fasting, not absolute abstinence from food, as in the forty days of Moses and Elijah, but as our record says, “I ate no pleasant bread, neither flesh nor wine came into my mouth.” From his position overlooking the whole world, and having charge of its affairs, he knows that his brethren at Jerusalem are at this time keeping their first Passover after their return.
He receives no instant answer to his prayer as in Dan 9 . And then sets out on his visit to the Tigris River, sixty miles away, and there, on the twenty-fourth day of the month, that is, three days after he quit praying, attended by a few companions, he gets an answer to his prayer that knocks him off his feet: He sees the vision of the Son of God and obtains an explanation of the delay in the answer to his prayer. When centuries later Saul of Tarsus saw at midday near Damascus a vision of the same glorious Person that Daniel sees here, the record says:
“The men that journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice but seeing no man.” Now this record says (and let us observe the likeness), verse Dan 10:7 : “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.” How very much like that is the account of Saul’s seeing the Lord! What Daniel saw was this: “I lifted mine eyes and looked and beheld a man clothed in new linen whose loins were girded with pure gold of Uphaz. His body also was like the beryl and his arms and his feet like unto burnished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude.”
Now let us see how he looked when John saw him in the island of Patmos, that we may note another remarkable likeness: “I saw one like unto the Son of man clothed with a garment down to the feet and girded about at the breast with a golden girdle.” That tallies exactly with this account, “And his head and his hair were white as snow and his eyes were as a flame of fire.” In this account the eyes are “like flaming torches,” “and his feet like unto burnished brass, as if it had been refined in a furnace, and his voice as the voice of many waters.” The tally is perfect.
What Daniel saw was a pre-manifestation of the Son of God. There are three pre-manifestations in this book. (Dan 3:24 ; Dan 8:15 ; Dan 10:5-6 ). There are many others in the Old Testament. As the Son of God, or the Logos, he appeared to Abraham, Moses, Job, Isaiah, and Ezekiel, and always he appears in the time of a great darkness and of great distress to his people. The effect of the appearance on Daniel is very great. Let us see: “So,” that is, when the companions went away, “I was left alone and saw this great vision and there remained no strength in me, for my comeliness was turned in me into corruption and I retained no strength.” He refers to it again in another place, showing that he fell into a trance of unconsciousness.
It is both interesting and suggestive to compare the effect on Daniel when he saw the glorious Son of God with the experience of others who saw him in glory, both before his incarnation and after his exaltation. It terrified all of them, took away all human strength, humbled them in the very dust, made them keenly conscious of their own sinfulness in the light of the divine holiness, led them into most gracious experiences of the divine condescension and to higher consecration and power.
Abraham was converted by it (Gen 15 ), as also was Jacob (Gen 28:10-22 ), and later by another experience became a prince, having power with God and man (Gen 32:22-32 ). The face of Moses was made to shine (Exo 34:29-30 ), Paul fell to the earth and was converted (Act 9:22 ,Act 9:26 ). Nebuchadnezzar was startled and reformed (Dan 3:24-30 ). John fell like one dead (Rev 1:17 ). Ezekiel fell as if struck by lightning (Eze 1:28 ). Job, who could proudly maintain his righteousness and hold up his head before Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar, and Elihu, thus speaks when he meets the Almighty: “Behold, I am of small account, and what shall I answer thee? I laid my hand upon my mouth; once have I spoken. I will not answer, yea twice, but I will proceed no further.” The Almighty spoke to him again. Then Job said, “I know that thou canst do all things, that no purpose of thine can be thwarted. You ask who is this that hideth counsel without knowledge? I am the man, but therein I uttered that which I understood not, things too wonderful for me which I knew not, and I beseech thee and I will speak: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me. I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee. Wherefore I abhor myself and repent in dust and ashes.”
Let us now see exactly how it affected Isaiah. We find it in Isa 6:5 . It is in the year that King Uzziah died. Here is how it affected him: “Then I said, woe is me, for I am undone, because I am a man of unclean lips and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips, for mine eyes have seen the King Jehovah of hosts.” I repeat the statement of the last chapter, that
Only people very far off from God can ever appear unto themselves to be perfect or sinless.
Those very near to God always behold themselves to be vile and sinful. A garment supposed to be white, exhibited in a dark cellar, may seem clean, but if we bring it out in the bright light of day we can see how spotted and tarnished it is. In Daniel’s case, three of his senses sight, hearing, and touch took cognizance of this divine vision. In mercy this King of Glory strengthened and cheered Daniel as he had strengthened and cheered Isaiah and Ezekiel before. This is the way the record puts the tenderness of the divine mercy (Dan 10:10 ) : And, behold, a hand touched me, which set me on my knees and upon the palms of my hands. And said unto me, O Daniel, thou man greatly loved, understand the words that I speak unto thee, and stand upright; for unto thee am I now sent. And when he had spoken these words unto me, I stood trembling. Then he said unto me, Fear not, Daniel; for from the first day that thou didst set thy heart to understand, and to humble thyself before thy God, thy words were heard; and I am come for thy word’s sake. Dan 10:10-12 .
The Son of God leaves heaven and comes to earth in person to answer prayer. He continues: Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days; for the vision is yet for many days. And when he had spoken unto me according to these words, I set my face toward the ground and was dumb. And, behold. One in the likeness of the Son of man touched my lips: then I opened my mouth, and spake and said unto him that stood before me, O my Lord, by reason of the vision my sorrows are turned upon me, and I retain no strength. For how can the servant of this my Lord talk with this my Lord? for as for me, straightway 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. And he said, O man, greatly beloved, fear not: peace be unto thee, be strong, yea be strong. And when he spake unto me, I was strengthened, and said, Let my Lord speak; for thou hast strengthened me. Dan 10:14-19 .
How tender that is! How sweet the word! And notice the marvelous touch that reached out and took hold of that prostrate, benumbed man. The first touch rouses him from his trance, the second touch unseals his dumb lips, the third touch gives him strength to stand before God and talk with him.
We come now to a doctrine of the angels hinted at more than once before in this book:
The Ministry of the Angels in Human Governments. The record says, “The prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days.” “You have been praying one and twenty days. I heard you when you first commenced to pray, but the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days, but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me and I remained there with the king of Persia.” Again he says, in the twentieth and twenty-first verses: “Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I am come unto thee? And now will I return to fight the prince of Persia: and when I go forth, lo, the prince of Greece shall come. And there is none that holdeth with me against thee but Michael your prince,” that is, of all the angel princes of the nations there was only one to stand with the Son of God, and that was the angel of the Jewish nation (Dan 11:1 ): “And as for me, in the first year of Darius the Mede, I stood up to confirm and strengthen him.”
This language on its face teaches:
1. That Israel, Persia, and Greece had each an angel who was charged particularly with the affairs of that nation, and implies that it was so with other nations.
2. That these national angels would sometimes withstand one another, which implies that the conflicting angels were not appointed by one central power, else they would not conflict.
3. That the spiritual world is the background of the historical world.
4. That over the conflicting angels was, at the last analysis, a supreme power that settled the conflicts.
The higher critics contend:
1. That the book of Daniel makes an advance in the doctrine of angel ministry far beyond the teaching of the preceding Old Testament books.
2. That its doctrine of a guardian angel for each nation belongs to a much later period, namely, the inter-biblical times, or early Christian times.
To which it may be answered: That an advance in doctrine on any subject is characteristic of the Old Testament. Doctrines develop and are elaborated as the ages pass; for example, the doctrine of the Messiah. But it cannot be successfully urged that any teaching of Daniel on angel ministration is out of harmony with the teaching on the same subject in either the Old or New Testament books. The inter-biblical uninspired books only imitate Daniel’s ideas, but have not his discreet reticence, and betray their purely human origin by wild extravagances.
And yet the advance in Daniel on this subject is vastly overstated. From the beginning of revelation angel ministrations appear in behalf of or against both individuals and nations. In the book of Job, written, as I think, by Moses in Midian, and further, as I think, the first Bible book written, we first see clearly that the spiritual world is the background of the historical world) and that there are angels good and bad touching human affairs, and without a knowledge of which we could not understand the age-long problem of the undeserved afflictions of the righteous. From it also we learn the limitations on evil angels, their subordination to one Supreme Being, who, as well as good angels, must report statedly to Jehovah, and whose evil work is only permissive and temporary.
From Genesis and the Psalms we learn not only when, but why their interest in the history of men began. Throughout the Old Testament history they touch both the individual man and nations. It is true that the Septuagint translators of the Pentateuch attribute the first conception of national angels to Moses, rather than Daniel, in their rendering of Deu 32:8 : “He set the bounds of the nations according to the number of the angels of God.” But long before the days of the Septuagint translators Isaiah had hinted at a kindred thought to Daniel’s (Isa 24:21 ).
In the great council of heaven, both good and evil spirits present, seen by the prophet Micaiah (1Ki 22:19-23 ), an evil spirit is permitted to mislead the wicked Ahab and his ally as to the issue of the disastrous battle of Ramoth-Gilead. Satan, as the usurping king of this world, naturally puts his angels in charge of heathen governments and through them moves their earthly kings to obstruct the progress of the kingdom of God. Supernatural forces of evil were back of Jannes and Jambres when they withstood Moses. A basis of real fact underlies the perverted idea of the heathen, that each nation or city had its special deity. In Ezra and Nehemiah we can easily see the human forces obstructing the progress of the restoration of Jerusalem. Edom, Moab, and Samaria, through their misrepresentations at the Persian court, repeatedly blocked the way, but this chapter tells us that back of the Edomites and Moabites and Samaritans and Persians was the devil, and the angel through whom he controlled this nation.
QUESTIONS
1. What is the theme of Dan 10 ?
2. What is the relations of Dan 10:11 , Dan 10:12 to each other?
3. What is the date of the vision?
4. What is its occasion?
5. Why does Daniel mourn, fast and pray so long?
6. What contention of the critics do his prayers in Daniel 9-10 refute?
7. Where is the place of the vision?
8. Who was present, human, and superhuman?
9. What is the first great event that intervenes between Daniel 9-10?
10. Does this decree prove that Cyrus was a monotheist, and how do you prove that political reasons influenced him?
11. What is the second intervening event?
12. What is the distinction in time between the answer to this prayer and the one in Dan 9 , and why the delay here?
13. What similarity in the cases of the companions of Daniel and Saul at the time of their visions?
14. State the likeness between the visions of Daniel and John.
15. What other pre-manifestations of the Son of God in this book?
16. What is the effect of the vision on Daniel?
17. Compare this effect with that of others, in both Old and New Testament, having similar visions.
18. What great lesson does this teach?
19. What are four great lessons on angelology deducted from Dan 10:13 ; Dan 10:20 and Dan 11:1 ?
20. State the contention of higher critics on the angelology of the book of Daniel, and your reply.
21. Who was the angel of the Jewish nation, and why did the angels of other nations oppose him?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
Dan 10:1 In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing [was] true, but the time appointed [was] long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision.
Ver. 1. In the third year of Cyrus, king of Persia. ]. This whole chapter is but a preface to the ensuing prophecy, or visional prediction, recorded in the two following chapters. It beginneth at the third year of Cyrus’s empire, and reacheth till the time of the Jews rising from the dust of their dispersion, say some; to the end of the world, say others, with whom I concur.
A thing was revealed unto Daniel.
And the thing was true,
But the time appointed was long,
And he understood the thing.
And had understood the vision,
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Daniel Chapter 10 and Chapter 11
It is plain that chapters 10, 11, 12 are one continuous subject, and show us the circumstances in which Daniel received this last, and in some respects most remarkable of all his prophecies. For, in the whole compass of divine writ, there is no such circumstantial and minute statement of historical facts, and that, too, running down from the Persian monarchy, under which Daniel saw the vision, till the time when all the powers of this world shall be obliged to bow to the name of the Lord. Not that the prophecy runs on from the time of the Persian Empire to the reign of Christ without a single break: that would indeed be contrary to the analogy of all the rest of God’s word. But we have, first of all, a concise, and, at the same time, clear, statement of the facts, until we come to a remarkable personage, who was the type of the great and notorious leader of the opposition to God’s people at the close of the present age. Having brought us up to this, the prophecy breaks off, and then at once spans over the interval, and gives us “the time of the end”; so that we can understand how it is that there is that gap. For the present I must close where the break comes in. Upon a future occasion, I hope, the Lord willing, to take up the antitypical crisis at the close, which begins with Dan 11:36 . We shall find that it is not confined to any particular evil one; but that in the end of the chapter we have the conflicts of the leaders of that day in and round the Holy Land. And then Dan 12 shows us the dealings of God with His own people, until they and Daniel himself shall stand in their lot at the end of the days: this last – that is to say, the blessing of God’s people, or at least of the godly remnant – being the great object of the close.
“In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar,” etc. Daniel, we find, had not taken advantage of the decree of Cyrus, which went out two years before, leaving the Israelites at liberty to return to their own land, according to prophecy. Daniel was still in the scene of the captivity of the Jews. But more than that, the Spirit of God draws attention to the state of the prophet’s soul. He was not enjoying himself in a stranger-land, but mourning and fasting; and this, in circumstances where he had all, of course, at his command. He was found, as it is said, eating no pleasant bread, “neither came flesh nor wine in my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all, till three whole weeks were fulfilled.” Now surely it is not for nothing that the Spirit of God has shown us Daniel, not only before the decree of Cyrus was issued, but afterwards, in such an attitude before the Lord. We can all understand, when the moment approached for the little remnant to leave Babylon and return to the land of their fathers, that he should be found chastening his own soul before God, and passing in review the sin that had occasioned so fearful a chastening upon the people from the Lord – although he was even then doing exactly the contrary of what the flesh would have sought under these circumstances. For when some great outward mercy is vouchsafed, then is the time when man naturally is apt to give rather a loose rein to his enjoyment. In Daniel we see the contrary of this. He took the place of confession; and of confessing the sins, not merely of Israel, but his own. All was before him. None but a holy man could have so deep a sense of sin. But the same energy of the Holy Spirit, which gives real self-abasement, enables one also in love to take in the sad and abject condition of God’s people. Such thoughts as these seem to have filled the soul of Daniel when he found out, by the prophecy of Jeremiah, that deliverance was just at hand for Israel. There was no kind of exultation over a fallen enemy – no shouts of triumph because the people were to go free; although Cyrus himself considered it a high honour that God had made him to be the instrument of both. Well might a man of God ponder over what sin had wrought, when the Lord could not even speak of Israel as His people, although faith in Daniel only the more led him to plead that they were.
Here the decree had gone forth according to his expectation. The Persian conqueror had opened the door for the prisoners of hope to leave Babylon, and those who pleased had gone back to their own land. Daniel was not among these. Instead of now anticipating nothing but bright visions of immediate glory, he is still found, and found more than ever, in a posture of humiliation before God. When the reason of this prolonged term of fasting comes out, we are let into the connection of the world that is seen with that which is unseen. The veil is not merely raised from the future, for all prophecy does this; but the statement of the vision here given us discloses, in an interesting light, what is around us now, but unseen. Daniel was permitted to hear it, in order that we might know it, and might also have the consciousness for ourselves, that, beside the things that are seen, there are things invisible, far more important to the people of God than all man looks upon.
If there are conflicts upon earth, they flow from higher conflicts – the angels contending with these evil beings, the instruments of Satan, who constantly seek to thwart the counsels of God with regard to the earth. This comes out remarkably here. We know that angels have to do with the saints of God; but we may not have discerned so clearly, that they have to do also with the outward events of this world. The light of God here shines upon the subject, so that we are enabled to understand, that there is not a movement of the world but what is connected with the providential dealings of God. And angels are the instruments of executing His will; they are expressly said to do His pleasure. On the other hand, there are those that oppose God constantly: evil angels are not found wanting. Those who are not alive to this certainly lose something, because it gives us a far stronger view of the necessity of having God as our strength. Were it a mere question between man and man, we could understand that one person, in the consciousness of his strength or his wisdom, or other resources, might not fear another. But if it is a fact, that we have to contend with powers that are immensely superior to us in everything of outward intelligence and might (for angels “excel in strength,” as we are told), it is clear that we are thrown, if we are to be conquerors, upon the support of Another, who is mightier than all that can be against us. The faith that thus counts on God is a deliverance from anxiety about all that is taking place in the world. For although there are wicked spirits, and men are only as the pieces that are moved by them in the game of this life, yet, in fact, there is a supreme hand and mind that leads to the moves, behind the scene and unknown to the persons acting. This gives a much more solemn character to our thoughts of all that occurs here below.
Besides these angels, another appears on the scene: “a certain man clothed in linen, whose loins were girded with fine gold of Uphaz.” He, of whom we have so magnificent a description in verse 6, and whom Daniel alone sees, does not appear to have been a mere angel. He may have been seen in some features of angelic glory; but I conceive this is One, who often appears both in New and Old Testament history – the Lord of glory Himself. He appears now as a man – as One, who had the deepest sympathy with His servant upon the earth. All others had fled to hide themselves, Daniel abode: nevertheless, there remained no strength in him his comeliness was turned into corruption. Even a beloved man and faithful saint of God must prove that all his past wisdom was unavailing; for he was now a very aged man, and had been singularly faithful to the Lord. At this very time he was the one who best realized the true condition of Israel. For he saw well that a long time must elapse before the Messiah must come, and the revealing angel had announced that the Messiah should be cut off and have nothing. No wonder, then, that he was mourning. Others might be full of their bright hopes, that the Messiah would soon appear and exalt them as a nation in the world. But Daniel was found mourning and fasting; and now the vision passes before him, and this blessed Person reveals Himself to him. Yet, spite of all the love that rested upon him – spite of his familiar knowledge of God’s ways, and the favour that had been shown him in previous visions, Daniel is made thoroughly conscious of his own utter weakness. All his strength crumbled into dust before the Lord of glory. And this has a moral for us of no little moment. However much may be the value of what a saint has learnt, the past alone does not enable us to understand the new lesson of God. God Himself is necessary for this – not merely what we have learnt already. I think that this is a weighty truth, and most practical. We all know the tendency in prudent men to lay up a store for the time to come. I do not deny the value of spiritual knowledge in various ways – whether in helping others, or in ourselves forming a right and holy opinion of circumstances that are passing round. But where the Lord brings out something not previously learnt, then Daniel, spite of all that he had known before, is utterly powerless. He is most of all prostrated in this last vision, and realizes more than ever the nothingness of everything within him. He is thrown entirely upon God for power to stand up, and enter into what the Lord was about to make known to him. The same thing appears as to John, who had lain in the Saviour’s bosom while on earth, and of all the disciples had most entered into His thoughts. Yet, let that Saviour stand before him in His glory, to make known to him His mind about the future, and what was even the apostle John? The Lord has to lay His hand upon him, bidding him fear not. He has to encourage him by what He was himself – the Living One, who had died but was alive again, and had the keys of death and hades. Therefore it was that he was to listen with the most perfect confidence, because this was what Christ is. There was no power but must fail before Him.
Here Daniel, in his measure, enters into this. The death of the flesh must always be realized before the life of God can be enjoyed. This is important, practically. In the grace that brings salvation, it is not that death must be learnt first, and life afterwards. Life in Christ comes to me as a sinner, and that life exposes the death in which I lay. If I must realize my death in order for that life to come to me, it would be evidently man set into his true place, as a preparation for his blessing from God. This is not grace. “That which was from the beginning . . . which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life.” That is to say, it is the person of Christ Himself, who comes and brings the blessing. After that, the soul learns that “God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all.” It learns that if we say we have light, or fellowship with Him who is light, and yet walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth. All the practical learning of what God is, and what we are, follows the manifestation of life to us in the person of Christ. If you speak of the order as to a sinner, it is sovereign grace which gives life in Another; but if of the order of progress in the believer, it is not so. The believer, having already got life, must mortify all that pertains to him merely in nature, in order that the life should be manifested and strengthened. This is all-important for the saint, as the other is for the sinner. Man in his natural state does not believe that he is dead, but he is labouring to get life. He wants life; he has none. It is Another alone that brings and gives it to him in perfect grace – seeing only evil in him, but coming with nothing but good, and bringing it in love. This is Christ. But in the believer’s case, having already found life in Him, there must be the judgment of the evil, in order that the new and divine life should be developed and grow. So that, while to the one it is life, exposing the death, and meeting the man in death, and delivering him from it, to the other it is the practical putting to death everything that has already existence naturally in him. All this must have the sentence of death put upon it, in order that the life be unhindered in its growth and manifestation.
Daniel was proving this, as the practical means of entering into, and being made the suited witness of, the wonders that the Spirit of God was about to bring before him. Hence, whatever might have been the favour in which he stood – and he was “a man greatly beloved” – nevertheless, death must be realized by his soul. “And when he had spoken this word unto me, I stood trembling. Then said he unto me, Fear not, Daniel: for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words.” And then we have an intimation conveyed to him how it was that there had been such a delay. “But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one-and-twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.” Here, I apprehend, we have another person speaking. Not the first and glorious One that Daniel had seen, but one used as a servant – an angel, in fact, that the other employed. The last chapter will prove clearly that there was more than one person sent: and it is plain, from the language of the speaker, that he is subordinate. Daniel is encouraged by learning that, from the first day that he had set his heart to understand and to chasten himself before God, his words were heard. He did not receive the answer the first day nor the second. Not until one-and-twenty days after did the answer arrive, and yet it was sent from God the very first day. Of course, He could at once have given it. But what then? First of all, the terrible struggle, that is always raging between the instruments of God and the emissaries of Satan, would not have been so clearly understood. Then, again, faith and patience would not have had their perfect work.
I am not forgetting, that the Holy Ghost is sent down now to dwell in the hearts of believers in a way not known then. For, although the Spirit of God was always at work in the holy prophets and in holy men, yet the abiding indwelling of the Holy Ghost was that which was not, and could not be, till Jesus was glorified, and the great work of redemption was wrought, in virtue of which the Holy Ghost was sent down from heaven to take His abode in the hearts of those that believe, the seal of the blessing which is theirs in Christ. So that, besides the outward providential care of God, so beautifully brought out here, we have that blessed Divine Person constituting our bodies the temple of God. Yet the outward struggles go on. The same thing, that hindered Daniel from having the manifest answer to his prayer, may hinder us from having the answer of circumstances. The answer of faith we ought always to reckon on at once; the answer of circumstances, governed of God, so as to bring out a manifest answer, we may have to wait for. Daniel had to wait, and the reason is given us. From verse 13 we learn, that although God had sent the answer from the very first day, the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood for twenty-one days – exactly the time that Daniel was kept in mourning and fasting before God. “But, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.” Plainly it is an angel that speaks. It would be derogatory to the Lord to suppose, that He was the One who needed help from one of His own angels. But Michael was mentioned here, because he was well known to be the archangel, who took a special guardian care over the nation of Israel. So that, however people may make a mock at the truth of the interposition and guardianship of angels, yet Scripture is quite clear about it. Romanism, as we know, has made them objects of adoration. But the truth itself is of special interest.
That angels are employed of God in particular services is plain from the word of God. Nor was this merely a new truth. We find that Jude mentions, as a well-known circumstance, the contention of Michael the archangel with the devil about the body of Moses. The same truth comes out again in this. It was Michael’s care over the Jewish people. He knew their tendency to idolatry, and that the man, whom they had rebelled against during life, they would make an idol of after his death. And thus, Michael, as the instrument of blessing on God’s part to Israel, contends with Satan, so that the body of Moses was not found; the Lord is said to have buried it, though the instrument that the Lord employed was Michael. Now here we have this interesting ray of light cast upon earthly circumstances. The powers of this world may be governing, but angels have not given up their functions. There are the devil and his angels, and Michael and the holy angels with him, brought forward again in the last book of the Bible. The facts of Christ having come, and of the Holy Ghost having been given, do not supersede this. On the contrary, we know that there will be one most tremendous conflict at the close between the holy angels and the wicked ones, when the heavens shall be for ever cleared of those evil powers, which had for so long defiled them. This is most interesting, as showing the perfect patience of God. Because we know, that with a word He could put down the devil and all his host. But he does not. He allows Satan even to venture into the lower heavens – nay, still to have possession of them. Therefore it is that he is called “the prince of the power of the air,” as he is called elsewhere “the prince” and “the god of this world.” But I believe it is only there that he is prince. We never read of such a thing as Satan being prince in hell. It is a favourite dream of great poets, and of small ones too; but we never read of it in Scripture. The Bible shows us, that his real power now is either in the heavens or on the earth; but that when he is broken, both in his heavenly usurpation first, and then in his earthly power, he is cast down to hell; and that, instead of being a king in hell, he will be the most miserable object of the vengeance of God. The solemn thing is, that he is reigning here now, and people do not feel it. His worst reign is that which he acquired – not that which he had before. The death of Christ, although it is the ground on which he will eventually lose all his power, was, nevertheless, the means by which he became the great usurping power, opposing God in all His thoughts about this world. But here is a thought that is of importance for us. If God permits such a thing as this – if He allows the presence of this evil one, the enemy of His Son in heaven itself – if, instead of the crucifixion of Christ leading God to deprive Satan of all his power, we find him after this displaying His greatest long-suffering, what a lesson it all is for us not to trouble ourselves about circumstances! No man has ever trodden these unknown regions; there has been none to tell us about them except the word of God, which lays it bare before us. We do not know all, of course; but we know enough to see that there is this tremendous power of evil opposed to God, and that the power of God is always and infinitely mightier than the power of evil. Evil is but an accident, which has got into the world through the rebellion of the creature against God. By “accident,” I mean that it was only the creature’s interrupting for a time the purposes of God; while in truth it but served to bring them out with brighter lustre. To bless heaven and earth was the plan of God, and this will stand. Evil will be banished from the scene, and evil men will suffer the awful consequences of having rejected the only good and blessed One in Christ, the Lord.
But while the certainty of all has been made known to faith before the execution of the thoughts of God, we have the view opened to us of the grave conflict meanwhile that is unseen. This puts faith to the test. Daniel had to go on waiting, mourning, praying, spreading out all before God. We see in him the perseverance of faith – praying always. And how was not his faith rewarded! For when the angel does come, he makes known this at the bidding of the glorious One, who had first appeared to Daniel. It was the prince of the kingdom of Persia who had withstood him one-and-twenty days; but Michael had come to his help.
I may also observe, that we have an important hint, in the next verse, of the main objects to which God had an eye in this prophecy. Only persons who have read much know the torture the chapter has suffered through men bringing their own thoughts to explain it by. The pope, of course, has been very prominently introduced into it. And then the daring soldier of the early days of this century was found in it too: I allude, of course, to Napoleon. In short, whatever has been going on in the world of extraordinary interest persons have tried to find in Dan 11 .Dan 10:14 puts to the rout all such thoughts. “I am come,” says the angel, “to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days. for yet the vision is for many days.” Nothing can be plainer. It is put as a sort of frontispiece to the prophecy to show, that the great thought of God for the earth is the Jewish people, and the main design of this prophecy is what must befall them in the latter days. We have the series of the history almost from the day in which Daniel lived, but the latter days are the point of it. Prophecy in general may afford to give a little earnest close at hand, but we never see the full drift of it, save in the latter day; and then the thoughts and plans of God always have, as their earthly centre, the Jews and their Messiah. I do not mean to deny that the Church is a far higher thing than the Jews, and the relations of Christ to the Church nearer and deeper than His relations to the Jews. But you do not lose Christ and the Church, because you believe in His link with Israel Nay, if you believe not this, you confound them with your own relations to Christ; and both are lost, as far as definite knowledge and full enjoyment go. This is for want of looking at Scripture as a whole. If Dan 10 had been read as an introduction to Dan 11 , such a mistake might not have been made. But some read Scripture very much as others preach it. A few words are taken, and are made the motto of a discourse, which perhaps has no real connection with the scope of that passage – perhaps not with any other in the Bible. The thoughts may be true enough abstractedly, but what we want is a help to understand the word of God as a whole, as well as the details. If you were to take a letter from a friend, and were merely to fasten upon a sentence or a part of one, in the middle of it, and dislocate it from the rest, how could you understand it? And yet Scripture has infinitely larger connections than anything that could be written on our part; and therefore there ought to he far stronger reasons for taking Scripture in its connection than the little effusions of our own mind. This is a great key to the mistakes which many estimable people make in the interpretation of Scripture. They may be men of faith too; but still it is difficult to rise above their ordinary habits. The prophecy before us shows the importance of the principle I have been insisting on. Take the ordinary books on this prophecy – no matter when, where, or by whom written, and you will find that the great effort is to make a centre of their own days, etc. Here is the answer to all. Neither Rome, nor the papacy, nor Napoleon, is the object of the prophecy, but “what shall befall my people [Daniel’s people, the Jews] in the latter days.”
We then find Daniel expressing in humbleness of mind his unfitness for receiving such communications. First, one like the similitude of the sons of men touches his lips, and he is instructed to speak unto the Lord. He confesses his weakness – that there was no strength left in him. But “there came again and touched me one like the appearance of a man, and he strengthened me, and said, O man, greatly beloved, fear not: peace be unto thee, be strong, yea, be strong.” Men, until they are thoroughly established in peace, until their hearts know the real source of strength, are not capable of profiting by prophecy. Here we find Daniel set upon his feet, his mouth opened, his fears hushed, before the Lord can open out the future to him. His heart must be in perfect peace in the strength of the Lord, and in the presence of his God. Anxiety of spirit, the want of settled peace, has more to do than people think with the little progress that they make in understanding many parts of God’s word. It is not enough that a man have life and the Spirit of God; but there must be the breaking down of the flesh and the simple, peaceful resting in the Lord. Daniel must go through this scene, in order to fit him for what he is to learn; and so must we in our measure. We must realize that same peace and strength in the Lord. If I am in terror of the Lord’s coming, because I am not sure how I shall stand before Him, how can I honestly rejoice that it is so near? There will be a hindrance in my spirit to the clear understanding of the mind of God on that subject. The reason of this lack of competence is not want of learning, but of being thoroughly established in grace – the want of knowing what we are in Christ Jesus. No matter what other things there may be – nothing will repair this sad deficiency. I speak now of Christian men. As for mere scholars dabbling in these things, it is as completely out of their sphere as a horse would be in being set to judge of the mechanism of a watch. “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: . . . neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” It is only a scribe of this age meddling with what belongs to another world, of which he knows nothing.
We have a rapid survey of what was about to befall Israel in the latter days. It is the same speaker here as in Dan 10 . “Also I in the first year of Darius the Mede, even I, stood to confirm and to strengthen him. And now will I show thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia.” There we have the succession of Persian monarchs from Cyrus. Scripture does show us who these were, although their names are not mentioned here. I would refer you to Ezr 4 , where will be found these very three kings mentioned. In Ezr 4 the occasion arose out of the attempt of the enemies of Israel to stop the building of the temple; and these hired “counsellors against them to frustrate their purpose, all the days of Cyrus, king of Persia, even until the reign of Darius, king of Persia.” Now in order to understand that chapter, you must bear in mind that, from the sixth verse down to the end of verse 23, is a parenthesis. The beginning and end of the chapter refer to events during the reign of Darius. But the Spirit of God goes back to show that these adversaries had been working from the days of Cyrus till the days of Darius. Consequently, in the parenthesis, from verse 6-23 inclusively, you have the various monarchs that had come between Cyrus and Darius, whose minds the adversaries had been trying to work upon. “In the reign of Ahasuerus” ( i.e. the successor of Cyrus, called in profane history Cambyses), “in the beginning of his reign, wrote they unto him an accusation against the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem.” Then we have the next king. “And in the days of Artaxerxes wrote Bishlam,” etc. This is a different person from the Artaxerxes mentioned in Nehemiah, who lived at a later epoch, and is called in profane history Smerdis the magician, who by wicked means acquired the crown for a time, and lent an ear to the accusations against the Jews. This usurper was put to death through a conspiracy headed by Darius, not the Mede of Daniel, but the Persian spoken of in the Book of Ezra. Darius Hystaspes was his historical name. He follows immediately. Hence we have these three kings enumerated in Ezr 4 , exactly answering to the three in Dan 11:2 . Thus we find one part of Scripture throwing light upon another, without the need of going into the territories of man at all. “Behold there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia.” These came after Cyrus, and were called in Scripture, as we have seen, Ahasuerus, Artaxerxes, and Darius; and in profane history Cambyses, Smerdis the magician, and Darius Hystaspes. “And the fourth shall be far richer than they all; and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.” It is the celebrated Xerxes, who stirred up all against Greece. This confirms an idea thrown out on a former occasion, that the reason why the he-goat rushed with such fury against Persia was in return for the Persian assault upon Greece. Xerxes was the man who made that great attempt. His riches are proverbially known, and no event made so profound an impression on the world then as that expedition against Greece and its consequences.
In verse 3, Persia, the ram of Dan 8 , is dropped, and we find the he-goat of that chapter, or rather its horn. “A mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.” This is Alexander. “And when be shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven.” That was true at his death: the Greek Empire was then shivered into fragments. “And not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others besides those.” It was not to be a single head getting rid of the family of Alexander, and taking possession of all. His kingdom was to be divided into a number of parts, four more particularly; and out of these four divisions two acquire an immense importance. But what constitutes their chief importance here? When God speaks of things upon the earth, He always measures from Israel; because Israel is His earthly centre.
Hence it is, that the powers which meddle with Israel are those that in God’s view are important. This is the reason why the other kingdoms are not noticed; only those of the north and of the south. And why are they so described? Palestine is the place from which God reckons. The king of the north means north of the land that His eyes were upon: and the southern power means south of that same land. These are the countries commonly called Syria and Egypt. They are the two referred to throughout the chapter, the other divisions of Alexander’s empire being put aside. Only those are looked at which had to do with Israel. Now we are told that “the king of the south shall be strong” – he is the person well known as one of the Ptolemies or Lagidae – “and one of his princes” ( i.e. of the chiefs of Alexander); “and he shall be strong above him, and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion.” This is another person, the first king of the north, who rises in strength above Ptolemy. In profane history he is called Seleucus. The descendants of both these and their strife are often spoken of in the history of the Maccabees. There minute accounts are given of the transactions predicted in this chapter; and of the two, what God says in few words is infinitely more to the point that man’s elaborate detail.
Put let us look a little at some of these events. “And in the end of years they [i .e. the kings of the north and of the south] shall join themselves together; for the king’s daughter of the south shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement.” One remark before going further. In this chapter it is not the same king of the north, nor the same king of the south, that we have all the way through, but a great many that succeed each other. The same official title runs throughout. As people say in law, The king, or the queen never dies. That is just the way we are to fool; at it here. This sixth verse is an instance. “In the end of years they shall join themselves together.” They are not the same kings of the north and south, who had been spoken of in verse 5, but their descendants. “In the end of years they shall join themselves together; for the king’s daughter of the south shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement.” They made, not only an alliance, but a marriage between their families. “But she shall not retain the power of the arm.” The attempt to make a cordial understanding between Syria and Egypt, by marriage, would be a failure. Of course, this was exactly verified in history. There was such a marriage, and the king of the north even got rid of his former wife in order to marry the daughter of the king of the south. But it only made matters a great deal worse They had hoped to terminate their bloody wars, but it really laid the foundation of an incomparably deeper grudge between them. As it is said here, “Neither shall he stand, nor his arm; but she shall be given up, and they that brought her, and he that begat her, and he that strengthened her in these times. But out of a branch of her roots shall one stand up in his estate, which shall come with an army, and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north, and shall deal against them, and prevail.” It was not her seed, but her brother – out of the same parental stock. She was one branch, and he another. The brother of this Bernice, daughter of the Egyptian king, comes up to avenge the murder of his sister, and prevails against the king of the north. Here we have the explanation confirmed of what the kingdom of the south is. “He shall also carry captives into Egypt their gods, with their princes, and with their precious vessels of silver and of gold; and he shall continue more years than the king of the north. So the king of the south shall come into his kingdom, and shall return into his own land.” There we see Egypt triumphant for a time; but the tide was soon to turn. “His sons shall be stirred up, and shall assemble a multitude of great forces: and one shall certainly come [the other disappeared], and overflow and pass through: then shall he return, and be stirred up, even to his fortress. And the king of the south shall he moved with choler.” Now comes another war al a subsequent date; and this time it is the south returning the blow of the north. “The king of the south. . . shall come forth and fight with him, even with the king of the north: and he shall set forth a great multitude; but the multitude shall be given into his hand.” There the Spirit of God refers to several notable facts. The two principal actors are the kings of Syria and Egypt. The land of Israel, that lay between them, was a sort of burdensome stone to these kings who made it their battle-field, which ever went to the conqueror. If the king of the north was victorious, Palestine fell under Syria; and in the same way if the king of Egypt got the better. But God never allowed rest to those who took His land. They might intermarry and contract alliances; but it only proved the prelude to graver outbreaks – brothers, sons, grandsons, etc., taking up the quarrels of their kindred. “The Scripture cannot be broken.” All was distinctly laid down beforehand.
“And when he hath taken away the multitude, his heart shall be lifted up; and he shall cast down many ten thousands: but he shall not be strengthened by it.” Then we find that the king of the north returns and “sets forth a multitude greater than the former, and shall certainly come after certain years with a great army and with much riches. And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision.” Allow me to call attention to these words. It at once settles the question that might be asked – How do you know that Daniel’s people do not mean God’s people in a spiritual sense? The answer is given here – “the robbers of thy people.” This at once puts aside the plea for a spiritual sense. We could hardly talk about “robbers” in that case. This confirms what ought not to have needed further evidence – that Daniel’s people mean the Jewish people, and nothing else. Here we find that some of the Jews form a connection with one of these contending monarchs of the north. These are called here “the robbers of thy people,” and take the part of Antiochus, the king of the north, against Ptolemy Philopater, or rather his son; but all came to nought. The Syrian king might hope that, by bringing in this new element, by getting the countenance of the Jews, perhaps God would be with him. But no. They were the robbers of the people – unfaithful to God, and not holding fast their separation from the Gentiles. They, too, might think to establish the vision, “but they shall fall.”
“So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities: and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither shall there be any strength to withstand. But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will [that is, the king of the north], and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed.” Another remarkable thing that we see here is, that the Spirit of God still holds to the importance of that little strip of land – the territory of Palestine. It was God’s gift to God’s people. Whatever might be its deplorable condition, it is the glorious land still. God repents not of His purposes: “He will yet choose Israel, and set them in their own land.” And if, when it is a question of God’s earthly purposes, He thus holds to them, spite of every hindrance, what will He not do for His heavenly people? Who can doubt that He will bring them to heavenly glory with Christ?
“He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom, and upright ones with him; thus shall he do: and he shall give him the daughter of women, corrupting her: but she shall not stand on his side, neither be for him.” This is another attempt at marriage; only it is the converse. It is not now the king’s daughter of the south coming to the king of the north; but the king of the north gives his daughter Cleopatra to the king of the south, hoping that she will maintain Syrian influence at the court of Egypt That is what is called here “corrupting her”; because it was plainly contrary to the very essence of the marriage-tie: it was an attempt to use her in order to serve his political purposes “But she shall not stand on his side, neither be for him.” The reasons of state – the innermost secrets of their hearts, alike come out here.
There is another disgrace, which is not only known to God, but is made known to His servants. “After this shall he turn his face unto the isles, and shall take many: but a prince for his own behalf shall cause the reproach offered by him to cease; without his own reproach he shall cause it to turn upon him.” That is, Antiochus meddles with Greece, and takes many of the isles; but this other prince, for his own behalf, takes up the contest against the king of the north. Here we have the entrance upon the scene of a new power – the first allusion to the Romans. A Roman consul is meant by the prince that comes on his own behalf against the king of the north. He will not allow Greece to be touched. It was one of the Scipios who interfered. “Then he shall turn his face toward the fort of his own land: but he shall stumble and fall, – and not be found.” He is obliged to return to Syria, but he shall stumble and fall.
”’Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom. The Romans, who defeated the father, obliged his son to raise a heavy annual tribute. That was all that the. poor man did during his life. “Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes…. but within few days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle.” He was killed by one of his own sons. “And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries. And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant. And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people.” This is the man who typifies the last king of the north. Called in profane history Antiochus Epiphanes, he was morally abominable, but most notorious for his interference with the Jews; first by flattery and corruption, and afterwards by violence. This is the man the Spirit of God dwells most on, because he most meddled with Israel, the glorious land, and the sanctuary. He it was who enforced idolatry in the temple itself, setting up an image to be worshipped even in the Holy of Holies. Therefore it is that he acquires importance. Otherwise he was a man little known, except for daring wickedness. Nothing can be more simple. His history consists of intrigues, first against the king of the south, and shell against the Jews; and of various expeditions, in some of which he was successful at first but afterwards entirely defeated. “He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province; and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers’ fathers…. And he shall stir up his power and his courage against the king of the south with a great army; and the king of the south shall be stirred up to battle with a very great and mighty army; but he shall not stand.” These kings meet and plan against each other, but all is vain. “Both these kings’ 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. Then shall he return into his land with great riches; and his heart shall be against the holy covenant; and he shall do exploits, and return to his own land [ie. in the north]. At the time appointed he shall return, and come toward the south; but it shall not be as the former, or as the latter.” Then we have further details.
“For the ships of Chittim shall come against him.” There are these indefatigable Romans that come in again. They had dealt with his father when he had made an attack upon Greece; and now that the son had his hand over the throat of his prey, the Roman consul came, and at once forbade his doing anything further. He even drew a circle round him, as is well known, when the artful king wished to gain time to evade. The answer was demanded before he stepped out of the circle, and he was obliged to give it. This was a death-blow to all his policy. He went home a miserable, defeated man, with a heart vexed and infuriate, though putting on a humble appearance before the Romans. What should hinder him from wreaking out the anger of his heart upon the Jews? As it is said here, “Therefore shall he be grieved, and return, and have indignation against the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return, and have intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant.” Poor as the Jews were, they were witnesses for God upon the earth; and Antiochus hastens to pour out his fury upon whatever bore a testimony to God among them. This was his ruin, and brought God’s vengeance upon him. “He shall even return, and have intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant,” i.e. with the apostates of the Jews. “And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.” He will put an end to the Jewish service, and will set up an idol, “the abomination that maketh desolate,” in the temple of Jerusalem. It is a mistake to suppose that this refers to the last days. It is only a type of what will take place then. The latter part of the chapter, and the next chapter, do refer to the latter day in the full sense of the word. But here is the step of transition from what is past to the future.
We come down in regular historical order to Antiochus Epiphanes, and then meet with a great break. Scripture itself intimates as much. But Antiochus did on a small scale what the great northern king of the latter day will do on a larger one. It is said (verse 35)…. “even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.” There God stops. He says, as it were, I have come to the man that shows you in type what is to befall you in the latter days; and so He dwells emphatically upon this king, laying before them the extreme wickedness of his heart and conduct. The Spirit then cuts short the course of the history, and plunges at once into the last scene. This, however, must be reserved for another occasion. What we have seen shows us that whatever may be the general outline of events elsewhere, God can be, and sometimes is, singularly minute in the details of a prophecy, and nowhere more so than in this very chapter. And what is the main objection raised by infidels against it? That it must have been written after the events had taken place! Certain it is, that there is no historian since these times who gives us such an admirable account as we have in these few verses. If I want to know the history of these two contending monarchies, Syria and Egypt, I must look here. How entirely we can confide in the word of God about everything! It may be an exception to His general rule to dwell upon the kings of the north and of. the south, but He does so at times. The great thing on which He bestows care is the souls of His people. May our hearts answer to the interest He takes in us!
From the twenty-first verse we have had the account of the king of the north, known in profane history as Antiochus Epiphanes. The Spirit of God has entered into much fuller detail in speaking of his history, because his conduct, specially at the close, in meddling with the Jews, and their city, and their sanctuary, furnished the occasion for a type of the last king of the north, who will be found following in his predecessors’ wake, save that his guilt will be incomparably graver in the sight of God – so flagrant indeed, that His judgment can tarry no longer. This accounts for a circumstance that has often perplexed the students of Daniel’s prophecy. We read of an ”abomination that maketh desolate” in the predicted account of Antiochus (Dan 11:31 ); and it has been commonly supposed that our Lord refers to this in Mat 24:15 . Those who looked for the future fulfilment of this abomination have sought to reconcile it with the facts by the assumption that the Spirit of God must have branched off to the future personage that Antiochus represented. But in my judgment there is no need for anything so unnatural. Antiochus Epiphanes was only a type, and verse 31 does not go beyond his history, save as a foreshadowing.
In other words, to the end of verse 31 all is strictly historical – typical, of course, of the future, but nothing more. And therefore the answer to the difficulty that some find in our Lord’s quoting, as they suppose, Dan 11:31 , is really as plain as possible. He does not quote this verse. The passage He refers to is in Dan 12 . In Dan 12:11 , you will find an expression similar to this. “And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety Jays.” There we. have a defined date, which connects this last setting up of the desolating abomination with the deliverance our Lord predicts in Mat 24 ; for Jacob’s most fiery trial is that which just precedes his deliverance.
Now there are more reasons than one for believing this passage in Dan 12 to be what our Lord cites. Some of them depend upon considerations more fit for the study than for public ministry. But the sum of the matter is, that the expressions the Holy Ghost employs, in Dan 11:31 and in Dan 12:11 , differ. In Dan 11:31 it means the abomination of him that desolates, or of the desolator. Whereas, in Dan 12:11 , the true meaning is that which is given in our Lord’s words – not the abomination of him that maketh desolate, but the “abomination of desolation”; which is, I suppose, what is meant in the English version by the words, “that maketh desolate.” Thus the two phrases are distinct. Although there is a resemblance between them, there is also a difference; and that difference is enough to show that our Lord spoke not of the abomination set up by Antiochus, but of that mentioned in Dan 12 . Consequently, there is, in fact, no difficulty to be removed; because the desolation spoken of in Dan 11 is past, and the desolation of Dan 12 , that our Lord draws attention to, is future.
That this is so, will appear from other considerations also. Thus, in the verses that follow, we have a state of things distinct from what will be in the future tribulation of Israel. “Such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits.” Now we find from the Revelation, and other parts of Scripture which speak about the future of Israel, that the godly remnant could hardly be said to do exploits. They will suffer; but I do not think that deeds of power thus characterize the blessed ones who are to pass through the dreadful crisis of the future. In the days of Antiochus, it was not so much suffering, but being “strong,” and doing “exploits” – exactly what was true of the Maccabees and others, who undoubtedly were not so much a band of martyrs as a set of men who roused the spirit of Israel, and resisted the cruel and profane scourge of that day. Again, we read, “And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days.” There is a long period, observe, of sorrow and trouble, that follows the outbursts of courage and prowess against the desolator, and this is still continued in the following verses. “Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help: but many shall cleave to them with flatteries. And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.” Clearly, then, these trials are before the time of the end. The Spirit of God is here referring to what has already taken place. Accordingly we have a picture of terrible disaster that goes on, as it is said, “to the time of the end.”
From all this, I infer, then, that the Spirit of God singles out the desolation which then befell the people of Israel, and the defiling of the sanctuary under Antiochus or his generals. This brought vividly out the circumstances of the last days; but, along with them, certain other circumstances were added, which ought not to be expected in those days. In other words, we arrive at what may be called the long and dreary blank that severs the past history of Israel, and the struggles in their land against neighbouring aggressors, from the great crisis of the last days. This is where the true break occurs. Certain disasters were to go on “to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.” There is no place in the chapter where the interruption of the history so well fits in as after verse 35.
But now, in verse 36, we have another person abruptly introduced into the scene. We are not told who he was, or whence he came; but the character that is given of him, the scene that he occupies, the history that the Spirit of God enters into in connection with him – all declare, too plainly, that it is the terrible king who will set himself up in the land of Israel in personal antagonism to the Messiah of Israel, the Lord Jesus. He it was of whom our Lord spoke, when He said that, if they refused Him who had come in His Father’s name, they would receive another coming in his own name. Nor is this the only passage of Scripture, where this same false Christ, or rather Antichrist (for there is a difference between the terms), is described as “the king.” Not only are there different references to him under other epithets, but in the greatest and most comprehensive prophecy of Scripture, Isaiah, like Daniel, introduces “the king,” as if he must be known at once. In Isa 30 we have an enemy of Israel, called the Assyrian. Doubtless, looking at past history, Sennacherib was their great head in that day. But he only furnished the opportunity to the Spirit of God to bring out the future and final adversary of Israel. His fall is here brought before us. “For through the voice of the Lord, shall the Assyrian he beaten down, which smote with a rod. And in every place where the grounded star shall pass, which the Lord shall lay upon him, it shall he with tabrets and harps: and in battles of shaking will He fight with it.” After the end of that victory there will be exceeding joy for Israel; instead of the train of sorrow, which most victories bring, there follows unfeigned gladness before the Lord. “It shall be with tabrets and harps.” For the enemy there will be proportionate misery. Something still more awful and unending than temporal destruction falls upon the proud foe. “For Tophet is ordained of old: yea, for the king it is prepared; He hath made it deep and large: the pile therefore is fire and much wood; the breath of the Lord, like a stream of brimstone, doth kindle it.” In our version there is a singular obscurity’ remarked by another, in this verse At first sight it might appear that the Assyrian and “the king” were the same person. The true rendering is, “For the king also it is prepared” – that is, Tophet is prepared for the Assyrian, but besides, for THE KING also. Just as in our passage in Daniel, we have the Assyrian or king of the north on the one hand, and “the king” on the other. The same frightful end awaits them both. But I only refer to this now for the purpose of showing, that the expression, “the king,” is not unprecedented in Scripture, and that it applies to a notorious personage the Jews were taught in prophecy to expect. God, in judicial retribution for their rejection of the true Christ, would give them up to receive the Antichrist. This is “the king.” He would arrogate to himself the royal rights of the true King, the Anointed of God. Tophet was prepared for the king of the north, and also for “the king.”
But this is not all. In Isa 57 we have him introduced quite as unexpectedly. In Isa 55 are shown the moral qualities that God will produce in His people. In Isa 57 He shows us the fearfully iniquitous state then also found in Israel. And in that day God will no longer endure anything but reality. Forms of piety, covering uncleanness and ungodliness, will have passed away. There “the king” is suddenly introduced to us. (v. 9) “Thou wentest to the king with ointment, and didst increase thy perfumes, and didst send thy messengers far off; and didst debase thyself even unto hell.” To have to do with him was to debase oneself unto hell. No wonder that for “the king also” Tophet was prepared. This shows that, before the mind of Israel from the first, there was one that the Spirit of God led them to expect to reign over the land in the last days, who is called “the king.”
Thus at once is furnished a most important clue to Dan 11 . We are come to the time of the end. The blank is closed – the long dark night of Israel’s dispersion is well-nigh over. The Jews are in the land. In what condition” Are they under Christ? Alas! there is another and a terrible scene that must first be enacted there. “The king” that we have read of is there, and the course he pursues is just what we might expect from the landmarks of the Holy Ghost. “The king shall do according to his will.” Ah! are any of us sufficiently aware what a fearful thing it is to be the doers of our own will? Here is the end of it. It was the first great characteristic of sin from the beginning. It is what Adam did, and the fall of the world was the immediate result. Here is one who at that day may seem to be the loftiest and most influential of Adam’s sons. But he does “according to his will.” And nothing worse. Are we to read such a history as this without moral profit to our own souls? To forget what an evil thing it is ever to be the doers of our own will? Let none suppose that, because they may be in a position to rule, they are therefore outside the danger. Alas! it is not so: no one thing so unfits a person for righteous rule as the inability to obey. It is good first to know what it is to be subject. Oh! may it strike deep into all our hearts, that “the king,” the Antichrist, is first stamped as one doing his own will. May it test us how far we are seeking ours! – how far, under any circumstances, we are doing, or allowing anything, that we would not wish every soul in this world to see – perhaps even those that are nearest to us. Alas! one knows, from experience and observation, the difficulty and danger in these things from one’s own heart. Yet there is no one thing more contrary to that Christ whom we have learnt. We are sanctified “unto the obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.” It is not only to the blessing, in the sprinkling of the blood, but to the obedience of Jesus Christ – to the same spirit and principle of obedience; for that is the meaning of the expression. We are not like the Jews who were put under the law, and whose obedience had the character of obligation to do such and such things under penalty of death. We are already alive unto God, conscious of the blessedness in which we stand, and awakened to see the beauty of the will of God; for His will it is which has saved and sanctified us. This is our calling, and our practical work here below. Christians have no other business, properly speaking, than to do the will of Another. We have to do God’s will according to the character of the obedience of Christ – as sons delighting in the will of the Father. It does not matter what we may have to do. It may be one’s natural daily occupation. But do not make two individuals of yourselves – with one principle in your business or family, and another for the Church and worship of God. Never allow such a thought. We have Christ for everything and every day. Christ is not a blessing for us merely when we meet together or are called to die; but if we have Christ, we have Him for ever, and from the first moment we are emancipated from doing our own will. This we learn is death; but it is gone now in Christ’s death. We are delivered, for we are alive in Him risen. But what are we delivered for? To do the will of God. We are sanctified unto the obedience of Jesus Christ.
As for “the king,” you have in him the awful principle of sin which has always been at work, but which here exceeds all bounds. The moment has come when God will remove the providential checks which, up to that time, He will have put upon men, when Satan will be allowed to bring about all his plans; and that, too, in the very land whereon the eyes of God rest continually.
“The king shall do according to his will, and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself” – not only above every man, but “above every god.” And it is not only that he takes his place above these so-called gods, but “he shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods.” And strange to say (if one did not know the perfect wisdom of God, and could not wait for His counsels to be matured), in spite of his fearful profanity, “he shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished; for that that is determined shall be done.” This clause contains a word that gives us the key to the passage. For some have found immense difficulties in this portion of the word of God. Many have transported into this verse the Pope of Rome, others Mahomet, or Buonaparte. But here we find that “the king” is to prosper till the indignation be accomplished. What, or about whom? Has God indignation against His Church? Never. This is the time, too, of God’s patience with man – not of His indignation. With whom, then, is it connected? The word of God is perfectly plain. It is when dealing with Israel that God speaks of indignation: I have already shown this fully from Isa 5:10 , Isa 5:14 , and other passages, as it is entirely confirmed by the whole nature of the revelation here. For we read of one that would be the king of Israel – not in Constantinople or Rome, but in Palestine. And the time is a future outburst of indignation against Israel in the promised land. He (the false king) shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished. “Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women.” The expression, “the desire of women,” clearly, to my mind, refers to Christ – the One to whom all Jews were looking forward, and whose birth must have been above all things desired by Jewish women. It is plain from the connection that such is the true meaning. For it occurs between “the God of his fathers” (Jehovah) and “any god.” Nothing is less likely than, if it had merely referred to natural relationships, that it would have been thus placed. It was, probably, from the wish to apply this to the pope that such an interpretation has found currency. But let us only understand that the prophecy concerns Israel and their land, and all is plain. He shall not “regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women.” Christ is distinguished from “the God of his fathers,” perhaps, because the Son was to become incarnate. But Christ is regarded no more than the God of his fathers – an expression, by the way, which implies that he himself is a Jew. It is “the God of his fathers.” “For he shall magnify himself above all. But in his estate shall he honour the god of forces.” It is not that he goes forward as Antiochus did, trying to force Jupiter Olympus upon the Jews; but he adopts a new superstition. This also disproves the reference to the Syrian king, who was a Gentile. Here it is a Jew, who will take the place of the Christ, and who, of course, regards neither the true Christ nor Jehovah. It is a self-exalting personage who opposes the true God, i.e. who equally sets aside the superstitions of men and the faith of God’s people. Self-exaltation is his marked feature.
But this is not all. The Antichrist will be infidel, but not merely infidel. He will have rejected the God of Israel, and the Messiah. Nor will he honour any of the gods of the Gentiles. But even this man, although he sets himself up as the true God upon the earth, will, for all that, have some one to whom he bows and causes others to bow along with himself. The human heart, even in Antichrist, cannot do without an object of idolatry. So, in ver. 38, there is this apparent inconsistency that comes out in the Antichrist. “But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces.” He makes a god, as well as setting himself up to be God. “A god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.” It is entirely an invention of his own. More than that. He will divide the land among his adherents. “He shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain.” Such, then, is God’s account of the king that will be found in Palestine in the last days. And it is plain that this last verse is a most conclusive proof that he is in Palestine reigning. It is “the land.” The Spirit of God never so speaks of any other country. It was that land which was nearest to God – a sort of centre for all others.
Then we have a change in the history. “And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him.” This confirms what was said before – that “the king” is found “at the time of the end.” Then “shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships.” The Spirit of God had long before spoken about the kings of the north and of the south. It was important to show, that at the time of the end these powers will have successors, who will make their push at “the king” in the Holy Land. “The king of the south” – that is, Egypt – and the “king of the north” – that is, the holder of the present Syrian possessions of the Sultan – these two persons shall make a movement against “the king” Not that they have a common policy: on the contrary, they seem bitter enemies one of another. But “the king” so exalts himself, arrogating to himself such pretensions in the Holy Land, that God permits the final catastrophe to arrive. The king of the south comes first, and then the king of the north, who it appears will be the great military and naval leader of the east in those days. “The king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over. He shall enter also into the glorious land.” This can be no other land than that of Israel. The king is there. The northern king is a totally different person, an antagonist of “the king,” as well as the king of the south. The Spirit of God having introduced “the king,” without telling us whence he came, now drops that personage without telling us what became of him. His frightful destiny is shown us fully in other scriptures. But it was important to introduce him as an episode in Dan 11 , for the purpose of showing the last great conflict between the kings of the north and of the south. Accordingly he drops “the king,” and the rest of the chapter is occupied with the king of the north. He not only enters the glorious land, but he goes on with conquests elsewhere. “Many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon.” We find from Isa 11 that this is a very notable fact. These borderers lived on the outskirts of the Holy Land. God so orders that, if they escape the king of the north, they are to be ravaged by the triumphant Israelites. God will not permit that the early and bitter enemies of Israel should meet with their righteous retribution from the hands of any but the people whom they had so sought to oppose and injure. Accordingly, it would appear from Isaiah, that, a very little after, the Israelites execute God’s judgment on them.
“He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape. But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.” From this we learn, that the king of the north is not acting as a colleague with the king of the south. He proceeds down to the south, where, it would appear (ver. 43), there will be a great development of material prosperity, whether from the resources of the land itself, or more probably from its becoming the great emporium of western and eastern commerce in that part of the world. “But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him” It is when he is down in the south, beyond Palestine, that he hears these rumours of perplexity in the north and east. He had come himself from the north, and was the conqueror over the east also; and now he has tidings from these quarters which agitate him. He hastens back from the land of Egypt and reaches Palestine. “And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas [that is between the Mediterranean and the Dead seas] in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.” This is the doom of the once victorious king of the north – not of “the king” who was introduced by the way to show us the occasion of the final struggle between the north and south.
I would now desire to inquire whether there be not other scriptures of interest to connect with what we have just been looking at. In the close of Zechariah, we shall find information of great interest. Just a word or two first on Zec 11:16 . The Spirit of God there says, “Woe to the idol shepherd that leaveth the flock!” This I conceive is clearly the Antichrist – “the king.” For, looking at verse 16, we learn that this idol shepherd is in the land. “Lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the land, which shall not visit them that be cut off, neither shall seek the young one, nor heal that that is broken, nor feed that that standeth still: but he shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their claws in pieces.” This utter selfishness, and self-exaltation, and spoiling the flock, instead of feeding it and carrying the lambs in his bosom, is in frightful contrast with Christ, the Good Shepherd. Thus the false shepherd, Antichrist, is to be raised up in the land of Israel, and there he does not spare the flock of God.
But in Zec 12 we have another power. It is said, in verse 2, “Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.” There are nations gathering against Jerusalem: just as in Dan 11 , the king of the north comes down, and the king of the south. Nations assemble against Jerusalem while this idol shepherd is there. Jerusalem and the Jews are the object of attack. “And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.” Victory seems to incline to the assailants of Israel. But none can then harden themselves against them and prosper, because the Lord will have identified Himself with them in that day. “In that day, saith the Lord, I will smite every horse with astonishment, and his rider with madness: and I will open mine eyes upon the house of Judah”; and then we have the way in which the Lord will defend His people in that day. But what may make it still plainer is that which we read in Zec 14:2 , “For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.” Here we have additional disclosures that you would not have gathered from Zec 12 . Thus we learn that “the city shall be taken …. and half of the city shall go forth into captivity”; evidently distinguishing this future siege from the past. When the Chaldeans took the city, they carried all away captive. When the Romans took it, all they spared were made prisoners. Here we have another siege, in which half will be taken and the other half not. And if anything can more clearly mark off the future from the past, it is that the nations, having taken half of the city, will not pursue their victory farther. Why? “Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when He fought in the day of battle. And His feet shall stand in that day upon the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the cast.” Who can pretend that this has ever been accomplished? Who can say that the Lord has thus come and stood upon the Mount of Olives? How can you reconcile the past with such a statement as this? The Lord has never been on Jerusalem’s soil as a conqueror since that day. Was it thus when Titus besieged it? Do you try to explain it away as merely a providential deliverance? But, I ask, Were they delivered then? They were taken captive. Jerusalem’ to this day, remains trodden down of the Gentiles, and must, till the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. But the passage indicates the times of the Gentiles closing in, the end of Gentile oppression. When this day is verified, and the Lord goes forth to fight against those nations, His feet shall stand upon the Mount of Olives. And, as a mark that this is not to be allegorized, we find that the Spirit adds, that the Mount of Olives is to split in twain – an outward physical proof that the Lord God has planted His feet there. “The Mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.” “Ye shall flee to the valley of the mountain,” – that is, it will form a valley between the two – “for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal …. and the Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with Thee.” There, again, we find a most clear proof that there is a future siege of Jerusalem, and that this siege will be characterized by two attacks. The first attack will be successful against Israel: half the city will be taken, and all the miseries of a frightful siege will follow, as far as half the city is concerned; but the other half is reserved for the Lord, who will bring the third part through the fire. He will put Himself at their head, and crush all the nations of the earth that come together against Jerusalem. Thus the second attack will be to the ruin of those that make it. If we connect this with Daniel, how plain is the additional light that we get! The king of the north first comes down when the king of the south is pushing at “the king” in the Holy Land. There is a simultaneous assault made upon Israel, to destroy the people in the land, who, alas! deserve it. But in the midst of evil there will be a godly seed. God will employ these assailants to do the work of the executioner. The wicked will be taken away; and, when God has purged those that remain, there will come another scene. The king of the north, having been successful in his first attack, pursues his way towards Egypt, against the king of the south. He comes there, but tidings from the north and east trouble him, and he returns to his own destruction.
Meanwhile, we may ask, what is become of “the king”? Has he been destroyed in the collision between the kings of the north and of the south, that had taken place in the land? No. What then is become of him? How does he fall? “By the brightness of the appearing” of the Lord from heaven. He is reserved for the hand of God Himself. He will be cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone. “For the king also it is prepared.” Thus we have the Old Testament and the New giving us one concurrent testimony. It will be by no ordinary doom of ruined man that he will perish. It is God departing from all His ordinary ways of dealing with the wicked. Men have been from time to time taken up in the grace of God from this world without passing through death; and there are men for whom it is destined of God to be sent down alive into hell – the terrible contrast of those, who are alive when Christ comes, waiting to be taken up to heaven. It will be so with that wicked one, the idol shepherd – “the king” – and not with him only. The king of the north is a bolder enemy still. “The king” has set himself up in the land, corrupting and apostatizing the people of Israel. He has met with his doom. If only the slightest word of the judgment that had been executed in the land were to reach the king of the north, we can understand how he would be troubled. Whether that is the cause of his hasty return to Palestine, or because the ten tribes were in movement, I do not pretend to say. We are not told. But he comes up to the Holy Land again; and, this time, it is to fall under the immediate hand of God – not with the sword of a mighty man, nor with the sword of a mean man. Not man, but God, will execute the vengeance upon him. Here we find the reason why there were two attacks. After his first assault on Jerusalem, he has gone down into the south, and has pursued certain conquests there. Excited by the tidings referred to, he hastens to return, hoping now to have it all his own way. “Then shall the Lord go forth and fight against those nations, as when He fought in the day of battle.”
But I must also ask you to look, before closing, at one or two other passages. Take Isa 28 and 29, where you will find abundant confirmation of all that I have touched upon in this closing scene. In Isa 28 you will observe that there are two great powers of evil connected with the land of that day – one “the king,” who is in relation with the people, and in the land; the other the king of the north, who comes down as an antagonistic power.* We shall find both these in this chapter. First, Ephraim is mentioned, and the Lord pronounces woe upon “the drunkards of Ephraim, whose glorious beauty is a fading flower…. Behold, the Lord hath a mighty and strong one, which as a tempest of hail and a destroying storm, as a flood of mighty waters overflowing, shall cast down to the earth with the hand.” There, I apprehend, you have the inroad of the Assyrian as the dreadful storm from the north, that would break forth upon Ephraim. If we look at the middle of the chapter, we shall find another thing. We have seen what was the condition of Ephraim, who dwelt in the outskirts of the country. But what was the destiny of Jerusalem, the capital? “Because ye have said” (ver. 15), “We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement.” There we have evidently what is connected with “the king” who will be in Jerusalem, and who will form a compact with “the beast,” the great imperial power of that day, to whom Satan will have given his throne. There is full harmony between what we have in Isaiah and Revelation and Daniel. “We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us.” Mark that. The overflowing scourge is the king of the north, the outside power that is coming down upon them. They of Jerusalem have made a covenant with death and with hell (that is, with instruments of Satan) in that day: and they hope by this means to escape the king of the north. I have already shown that “the beast,” the great power of the west, will be in connection with “the king” at Jerusalem – that the western parts will be the great seat of the beast – that he will command all Europe that properly belonged to the Roman Empire. When that empire is reorganized, he will be the main instrument of using its strength. “The king” will have made a covenant with him; or, as it is said in Dan 9 , he, that is, the Roman prince, will make a covenant with the mass of the Jews. At the close, both are found in Jerusalem, fighting against the Lord and His saints coming from heaven. They will find their supposed strength in this covenant, but it will not stand. The overflowing scourge (the Assyrian) sweeps on, and half the city of Jerusalem is taken. How marvelously does Scripture hang together! Then (Isa 28:16 ) comes in the reference to the Lord’s laying a foundation stone in Zion, which is evidently a word for the faithful remnant of that day, however true for us who believe now.
* Mr. Elliott ( Horae Apoc., 5th ed., vol. iv., p. 735, note 4, ) makes it to be an essential part(!) of the futurist theory that the Antichrist is, during part of the last three and a half years to be occupied in besieging Jerusalem from without. That some writers, ancient and modern, have fallen into this stupendous mistake, is plain enough. but Mr. E’s assertion is totally unfounded. The truth is (and Mr E. ought to know it well), that very many authors, both historical and futurist, have been guilty of confounding “the king” with “the king of the north,” at the close of Dan 11 , and elsewhere, but it is false that the error is essential to futurism more than to the Protestant school. Not a few beside myself had seen and avoided this confusion before Mr. E’s book was written.
Isa 29 is the last portion to which I wish to refer. There we have the closing desolation of the city. “Woe to Ariel, to Ariel, the city where David dwelt! . . . Yet I will distress Ariel, and there shall be heaviness and sorrow: and it shall be unto me as Ariel. And I will camp against thee round about and will lay siege against thee with a mount, and I will raise forts against thee.” This is the siege spoken of in Zechariah. “And thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of the ground,” etc. That is their condition when they are desolated. But mark, in verse 5: “Moreover the multitude of thy strangers shall be like small dust…. Thou shalt be visited of the Lord of Hosts with thunder, and with earthquake …. And the multitude of all the nations that fight against Ariel …. and that distress her, shall be as a dream of a night vision.” The Lord has gone forth and fought with those nations as when He fought in the day of battle. Sufficient evidence is thus brought from various parts of the word of God, which entirely falls in with, and throws light upon, the very interesting portion of Daniel now before us. All concur in showing most clearly that there is a terrible future for the apostate Jews and their western associates; and no less terrible for their confederate eastern adversaries. The covenant with hell will not stand. When the great powers of the world will have, apparently, swept all before them, and have gathered for the last great struggle before Jerusalem, God will take that opportunity for dealing with them after His long term of patience. It will be the closing scene. They will think that universal monarchy is to be in their hands; but it will be God’s day for summoning them to judgment. Here I speak of a judgment of nations and of kings – not of the dead before the great white throne. (Rev 20:11-15 )
God is about to deal with the earth – with men in the midst of all their plans. The regeneration of the world will be the great day when the Lord, having weeded out of Israel the transgressors, and used “the king” himself, and the judgment that fell upon him, to separate the true ones of Judah from the wicked, will cause the hour to chime when the account must be settled with the nations. This appears to me to be the simple, straightforward statement of the truth of God that we have here. We are not to suppose it is merely a question of one great power only. There will be different principles at work. And it is an awful thing to think that these lands, where we enjoy such privileges, are to be then overspread with the deepest darkness. The covenant with death and with hell will be because of an alliance made with the highly civilized western world. What a humbling thing for the pride of man! Civilization in a day that is past did not keep the mightiest minds from degrading idolatry and filthiness. Alas! we shall have a still worse scene at the close. Christendom will end in restored idolatry, in novel false gods, in man himself worshipped as God. Such, I believe, is the predicted future of this age. But love can keep the heart the same from being entangled with all that leads to it – Christ Himself. May we be occupied with Him, not building upon men’s foundations, not hoping their hope, not trusting to progress, or even to religion, so called! If Christ is my object in everything, safety is found there, and nowhere else.
Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Dan 10:1
1In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a message was revealed to Daniel, who was named Belteshazzar; and the message was true and one of great conflict, but he understood the message and had an understanding of the vision.
Dan 10:1 third year of Cyrus This seems to contradict Dan 1:21, but it means that Daniel lived during the entire exilic period and into the Persian period. Old Testament dates are not as precise as our modern dating systems.
king of Persia Cyrus was of half Median descent (his mother) and half Persian descent (his father).
In Dan 10:13 an angelic prince of Persia is identified with the kings of Persia. This is a corporate understanding of a national entity or a guardian advocate of an angelic realm. It is so hard to know in Daniel what is literal and historical and what is apocalyptic and just supplied for impact! Since this is the only place (except Deu 32:8 in the LXX) where national angels are mentioned I think it best to yield to the genre and maintain its symbolic nature.
the message was true The term message in NASB is literally word (BDB 182, cf. Dan 9:2; Dan 9:12; Dan 9:23; Dan 9:25; Dan 10:1; Dan 10:6; Dan 10:9; Dan 10:11-12; Dan 10:15). It is translated as matter, word, message, or revelation. This word is used five times in chapter 9 and eleven times in chapter 10. It is the term used in Dan 12:4; Dan 12:9 as to what Daniel is to seal up.
The term truth (BDB 54) is the OT counterpart to pistis in Koine Greek. Its basic meaning is to be firm and, thereby, faithful and true. Here it is often used of the truthfulness of what is spoken (cf. Deu 22:20; 1Ki 10:6; 2Ch 9:5).
The angel’s message is true, but it is also revealed in apocalyptic imagery. Truth is not relating to the symbols or details, but to the overall message, which is found in chapters 11-12. Genre identification and characteristics have become the crucial hermeneutical tool in modern interpretation. Two helpful books in this area are
1. Gordon Fee and Doug Stuart, How To Read the Bible For All Its Worth
2. D. Brent Sandy, Plowshares and Pruning Hooks: Rethinking the Language of Biblical Prophecy and Apocalyptic
NASBone of great conflict
NKJVthe appointed time was long
NRSVit concerned a great conflict
TEVbut extremely hard to understand
NJBof a great conflict
Daniel was reminded that the Jews’ relationship to the world powers would be one of continuing conflict (cf. Psalms 2; Ezekiel 38-39). It is also possible this refers to the surprising angelic conflict of Dan 10:10-21. The TEV takes it as referring to the angel’s message itself, which was hard to grasp (cf. Job 14:14).
had an understanding of the vision This was Daniel’s gift (cf. Dan 7:15; Dan 7:28; Dan 8:27), but even so he still needed an angelic interpreter.
It is uncertain to what particular vision this refers.
1. the angelic conflict of Dan 10:12-21
2. the literary unit of chapters 10-12, which would make the vision the content of chapters 11-12.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
the third year of Cyrus. Called by his appellative “Darius” (= the Restrainer, or Maintainer, in Dan 9:1; Dan 9:424BC.) Two years later than Dan 9. This is Daniel’s latest date; which continues to the end of this book, seventythree years since his deportation: he being now eighty-nine years old.
thing = word, or matter.
Belteshazzar. See Dan 1:7.
but the time appointed was long = but [concerned] a long warfare.
time appointed. Hebrew. tzaba. Generally rendered “host” or “army” (Dan 8:10, Dan 8:11, Dan 8:12). Put by Figure of speech Metonymy (of Adjunct), App-6, for warfare.
long: or, great.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Chapter 10
Now in chapter 10,
In the third year of Cyrus the king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose [Babylonian or Chaldean] name was Belteshazzar; and the thing was true, but the time appointed was long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision. In those days I Daniel was mourning for three full weeks. And I ate no pastries, neither meat nor wine, neither did I anoint myself at all, until the three whole weeks were fulfilled ( Dan 10:1-3 ).
So, again, a time of special waiting upon God. The denying of his flesh by not eating any pastries or any meat, just on a vegetarian type of a diet. Not drinking any wine. And after the twenty-first day,
And in the four and twentieth day of the first month, I was by the side of the great river, which is Hiddekel; And then I lifted up my eyes, and I looked, and behold a certain man who was clothed in linen, whose loins were girded with the fine gold of Uphaz: His body also was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes like lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in color to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude. And I Daniel alone saw the vision: for the men that were with me did not see the vision; but a great quaking fell on them, so that they fled to hide themselves ( Dan 10:4-7 ).
Those are the kind of friends you want–something goes a little wrong and they flee. And so Daniel is left alone. But as he describes this man in linen, girded with gold, the appearance is extremely similar to John’s vision of Christ in Revelation, chapter 1, and if you put those two passages side by side it would appear that they are describing the same person indeed. John said he turned to see the one who was walking in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks. And he was clothed with a garment down to his foot. And around the chest he had a golden girdle. His head and his hair were white like wool, as white as snow. His eyes were like flames of fire. His feet like unto fine brass and his voice like the sound of many waters. And so you find parallel descriptions. And because of the parallel descriptions, many Bible scholars affirm that who John actually saw here was none other than the Lord Jesus Christ. This also is confirmed in their minds by the reaction that the appearance of this man had on Daniel, verse Dan 10:8 .
Therefore I was left alone, and saw this great vision, and there remained no strength in me: for my comeliness was turned into corruption, and I retained no strength ( Dan 10:8 ).
The effect of seeing Him was just devastating to Daniel. He would… just became weakened, no strength and his beauty just turned into corruption. This is the effect of any man who has a real vision of God.
Daniel said, “In the year that king Uzziah died, then I saw the Lord high lifted up sitting upon the throne His train did fill the temple. Then said I, ‘Woe is me for I am undone. I am a man of unclean lips. I dwell amongst a people of unclean lips.'” The effect of seeing the Lord is always seeing yourself in the true light. We don’t see ourselves in a true light because we see ourselves in the light of others. And I say, “Oh, I’m not so bad. Look at him.” You see, and I’m comparing myself with others. But Jesus said, “You do error in that you compare yourself with men.” To see myself in the real light as God sees me, I must see myself in the light of Jesus Christ. And looking at myself in the light of Jesus Christ, all I can do is bow my head and say, “I’m ugly. I’m filled with corruption. I’m unrighteous. I’m unholy. Oh God, depart from me. I’m a sinful man,” as Peter declared. “My comeliness, my beauty was turned into corruption. And I was weak, I was faint.”
And I heard the voice of his words: and when I heard the voice of his words, then I was in a deep sleep on my face, my face towards the ground ( Dan 10:9 ).
It just sort of wiped him out. He was just down on his face on the ground. And John, when he saw the vision of Christ, he fell on his face and it was as he was dead. And so the same effect on John as it had on Daniel here.
Now, the difficulty with this bright, glorious creature that Daniel saw as being Jesus Christ comes in the next passage, or in the next portion of the passage.
And he said unto me, O Daniel, a man greatly beloved, understand the words that I speak unto thee ( Dan 10:11 ),
Well,
And, behold, a hand touched me, and set me on my knees and upon the palms of hands. And said unto me, O Daniel, a man greatly beloved, understand the words that I speak unto thee, and stand up straight: for unto thee am I now sent. And when he had spoken these words unto me, I stood trembling. And then he said unto me, Fear not, Daniel: for from the first day that you did set your heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words. But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me for twenty-one days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia. Now I might come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision is in [the future,] many days ( Dan 10:10-14 ).
So I’m gonna give you again an insight what’s going to happen to your people in the days to come.
Now, it is inconceivable that the prince of Persia, which of course is Satan, the power behind the earthly thrones, you remember Satan said to Jesus, “All of the kingdoms of the earth belong to me; they are mine. I can give them to whomever I will.” And so even as in Ezekiel the king of Tyrus, Satan is addressed through the king of Tyrus, so Satan is referred to through the prince of Persia. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against these principalities and powers these evil spirit entities that are working in the high places of world governments. Really, Satan is not so much interested in you as he is in the world leaders, over which he can influence so many people by the edicts and all of the world rulers. He sends out his little puny cohorts after us, but really we’re no match for them. You’re fortunate you never dealt with the guy himself. You’d have no chance at all except, of course, greater is He that is in us than he that is in the world. So thank God through Christ we triumph. But he is dealing with the world leaders then so this one who was dispatched to Daniel was dispatched at the time that Daniel began his fast. But for twenty-one days he was restrained until Michael that great prince came and set him free.
Now Michael is always fighting with Satan it seems. And he is a match for him. They were disputing with each other over the body of Moses. Remember in the book of Jude when Michael was disputing with Satan over the body of Moses. Michael dared not to bring any railing accusation against him, but said, “The Lord rebuke thee.” In the book of Revelation, in the last final great battle, then Michael the great prince will stand up against Satan and fight against him and his armies. So this battle’s been going on between Michael and Satan. And here this angel was held captive, or this messenger was held captive until Michael came and delivered him.
Now, those who interpret the vision to be of Christ do see in verse Dan 10:10 a change of personages. Where he declares, “And behold a hand touched me.” Now we would in reading assume that that hand was the one of the person that he saw. But those who interpret the one that he saw as Christ say that Christ came, but also other messengers, because in chapter 12 one of the others, when he was declaring the Great Tribulation was coming, said, “How long until the end of these things?” And there’s conversations going on between them. So that one of the other messengers, one of the angels that was with Christ touched Daniel and set him on his knees, and it is the angel that is talking to him from here on through the end of the chapter. I do not believe that you can be dogmatic on this issue. It would certainly appear that this is the description of Jesus Christ, especially as compared with Revelation, chapter 1. And I tend to lean in that direction and I do see the change of persons in verse Dan 10:10 . It does appear that that is likely. There is no other angel so described as is this personage described. And because it so parallels the description of Jesus Christ, it would appear to me that it is none other than Jesus Christ. However, that’s a matter of opinion, and you can take it for what it’s worth.
But the main thing is that Daniel is to be given now understanding of the things that are going to take place towards the end.
And when he had spoken such words unto me, I set my face be toward the ground, and I became dumb [speechless]. And, behold, one like the similitude of the sons of men touched my lips ( Dan 10:15-16 ):
You see, there are other persons here.
then I opened my mouth, and spake, and said unto him that stood before me, O my lord, by the vision my sorrows are turned upon me, and I’ve retained no strength ( Dan 10:16 ).
I’m wiped out. God, you know, because these visions, I’m just wiped out. Don’t show me anything else, I can’ take it. I’m just…I’m totally whipped. I’m beat; I’ve had it.
For how can thy servant of this my lord talk with this my lord? for as for me, immediately there remained no strength in me, neither was there any breath in me ( Dan 10:17 ).
Remember, and John fell at his feet as dead and so he describes, “I had no strength, there was no breath, I was just wiped out.”
Then there came again and touched me one ( Dan 10:18 )
And you see there are several personages here.
like the appearance of a man, and he strengthened me, and he said, O man greatly beloved, fear not: peace be unto thee; be strong, yea be strong ( Dan 10:18-19 ).
Glorious word of faith.
And when he had spoken unto me, I was strengthened, and said, Let my lord speak; for you have strengthened me ( Dan 10:19 ).
Daniel said, “Hey, I can’t talk with you. I’ve had it, you know. I was…I’m wiped out; I have no strength.” And so he touches him and said, “Be strong. Be strong.” And he says, “Okay, now you can talk. I’m strengthened.”
Then he asked Daniel, “Do you know why I have come to you?”
Knowest thou wherefore I have come unto thee? and now I will return to fight with the prince of Persia ( Dan 10:20 ):
Hey, I’m going to head back into the battle. That thing was going great and I want to get back there, you know, with the prince of Persia.
and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come ( Dan 10:20 ).
So the prince of Persia is gonna be replaced by the prince of Grecia.
But I will show thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince ( Dan 10:21 ). “
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
Dan 10:1
Daniel’s Vision of the Latter Days Part 1 (Daniel 10)
Daniel chapters 10 though 12 are dealing with a single vision that Daniel received late in his life. We notice that in the seventy weeks prophecy there were three intervals of time in the vision. The first interval dealt with the period of time from the decree of Cyrus where he authorized the rebuilding of the temple to the time when it, the streets and the walls of Jerusalem were rebuilt.
The temple and the city had been destroyed by king Nebuchadnezzar of the Babylonian Empire because of Israel’s idolatry. Nebuchadnezzar’s reason for destroying Jerusalem was because her kings insisted on revolting against him and he decided to put an end to them thus setting a grim example to other nations within his empire of his tolerance for such behavior. Nebuchadnezzar took Jerusalem on his way to conquer Egypt and sent several captives and some of the temple vessels back to Babylon. He then set a king (Jehoiachin), on the throne and exacted a tribute from Israel to be paid yearly. Jehoiachin, also known Coniah and Jeconiah in scripture, wasted no time in withholding the yearly tribute and was replaced with Zedekiah who rebelled as well. For this third time that Nebuchadnezzar had to deal with Israel, he made a wasteland out of Jerusalem and utterly destroyed the ancient temple that Solomon had built centuries earlier.
From the first overthrow of Nebuchadnezzar to the decree issued by Cyrus was a period of seventy years as prophesied by Jeremiah. Following was a period of time in which the city and the temple was rebuilt. This period of time was the first interval of the seventy weeks prophecy by Daniel as recorded in chapter 9. The third interval was Messianic and started with the crucifixion of Christ and continued for an indefinite period of time and encompassed the gospel age up to the time when the new covenant had been both fully revealed and fully confirmed. Both the first and third intervals of the seventy weeks prophecy included specific events which would and did take place during these time periods with amazing accuracy. The second interval in the seventy weeks prophecy only received a passing mention.
The first interval was for seven sevens, the second interval was for sixty two sevens and the third interval was for one seven, totaling seventy sevens in all. The sixty two sevens is the period of time between the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the crucifixion of Christ which included all the events associated with the coming of the new covenant. There were no details regarding the sixty two weeks (sevens) given except what was necessary to identify the beginning of it and the end of it (Dan 9:25-26). Daniel’s last recorded vision of his life is a vision of the events that will occur, for the most part, in the sixty two weeks (sevens), interval of the seventy weeks prophecy and then goes beyond to the destruction of the temple in 70 AD where the time period for this vision ends. Everything that was prophesied in Daniel chapter 10 through 12 has been fulfilled.
Daniel Chapter 10 does not get into the actual vision itself. What we see in this first chapter is an account of the facts leading up to vision and an introduction to some heavenly beings and we learn that there are events going on with the affairs of Daniel’s world which are being carried out under the direction of spiritual beings. What we will take away from this chapter is that the events of the nations of earth at that time are not all progressing without direction and are under the supervision of celestial beings and in accordance with a predetermined plan of divine origin. The conclusion can be drawn that this has not changed and that all the events we have seen in history and that will be seen in the future are likewise following a master plan which scripture says has been in place since before the foundation of the world.
Let us make an observation before we get into this part of Daniel’s last recorded vision. It is human nature to want to know more of the unseen things which go on around us. It is easy to allow oneself to speculate and this is not a bad thing as long as we contain our speculation to just that and not allow it to be presented as an absolute truth. There are absolute truths in scripture. And absolute truth is something that can be demonstrated from scripture as being the truth in all cases with no exceptions. An example of an absolute truth is that we must hear, believe and obey God if we want to please Him with our lives of service to Him. The steps for becoming a Christian and then living the Christian life faithfully are clearly spelled out in scripture and we can know for an absolute certainty that we are saved. John tells us this in 1Jn 3:24 where he says our obedience to God is how we can know we are living in Christ. It is an absolute truth that obedience to the will of God is necessary in order to live in Christ.
There are other things in scripture which are not as clearly spelled out. These things are shrouded in mystery with only clues scattered here and there which we must assemble carefully in order to gain some understanding of them. Examples of this are the angels and how they work behind the scenes to bring about God’s purpose on earth. An error in this understanding does not constitute sin because there is no transgression of God’s law involved with an erroneous understanding of this. A misunderstanding of the role of angels does not constitute a transgression of God’s will because we are not commanded to understand the workings of angels perfectly. There is an absolute truth regarding the workings of angels, but there is insufficient evidence in scripture to know the absolute truth of how they work and all that they do. We do not know for certain just how Satan came to be what he did and why he made the choices he made. We do not know for certain why some of the angels chose to reject God’s will and follow Satan. We do not know for sure how this all works in God’s grand plan but we do know that it does. What is important to keep in mind is that speculation is just that and no more and it would be unwise to go beyond that and teach it as an absolute truth.
I have gone into detail on this because Daniel chapter 10 opens up a wide opportunity for insight into the mysterious workings going on behind the scenes and it is very easy to make hypotheses beyond the text and get into the realm of speculation. I have noticed in my research of this chapter that the really good commentaries refrain from going beyond just the provable facts of Daniel 10. This is probably the wisest course of action in that the authors have avoided speculation altogether and have not opened themselves up to criticism. Nevertheless, it is impossible to study this intriguing chapter of scripture from Daniel and not try and draw conclusions from it based on little tidbits and pearls of knowledge gleaned from other places in scripture. I am not going to resist this temptation in my preparation of this study. I am going to speculate but before we get into it, I want it made perfectly clear that conjecture is what it is and no more. I will lay the facts out and it will be up to the readers themselves to make their own applications and do their own hypothesizing. When I do submit to the temptation to speculate, I will clearly indicate that I am doing so. So with this disclaimer in place, let us now look to the text of a very interesting and intriguing chapter of scripture.
Dan 10:1 In the thirdH7969 yearH8141 of CyrusH3566 kingH4428 of PersiaH6539 a thingH1697 was revealedH1540 unto Daniel,H1840 whoseH834 nameH8034 was calledH7121 Belteshazzar;H1095 and the thingH1697 was true,H571 but the time appointedH6635 was long:H1419 and he understoodH995 (H853) the thing,H1697 and had understandingH998 of the vision.H4758
Dan 10:1
In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing was true, but the time appointed was long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision.
Daniel receives this vision in the third year of Cyrus, king of Persia who became the sole ruler of Medo-Persian empire in 536 BC. This would make the date about 533 BC. Cyrus was reigning over the Medo-Persian empire when Gubaru conquered the city of Babylon. Cyaxares, the uncle of Cyrus and a Median, reigned over the Babylonian province until he died in 536 making Cyrus the sole ruler of the Medo-Persian empire. The years of the captivity add up to seventy this way and it is my belief that this best fits the historical timetable.
“a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar”
Daniel is here announcing that the vision he is about to record had been revealed to him. He made sure he was properly identified as the same Daniel who had been taken captive and served the kings in the courts of Babylon for the last seventy or so years. Let’s keep in mind that the Babylonian monarchy had recently been overthrown and an entirely new regime had come to power. It was therefore necessary for Daniel to thus preserve his identity. There were doubtless other people named Daniel, but there was only one Daniel who was also known as Belteshazzar who would be recognized as a prophet of God. When the Israelites living at the time of this prophecy read it, they would know who Daniel was and that what he wrote was revealed by God.
“but the time appointed was long”
Here we have God revealing to Daniel that the fulfillment of this prophecy would be over a long period of time. This is in stark opposition to the words we see in Revelation where inspiration stated that those events were to “shortly come to pass” (Rev 1:1), and the time was “at hand” (Rev 1:3; Rev 22:10). Daniel was told that the time for the fulfillment of this prophecy was going to be for a long time. John was told in his vision that the time for fulfillment was at hand. Much confusion of scripture is propagated through ignoring these simple little textual clues.
“and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision”
Daniel here stated that he understood the vision he had received. This vision covers a lot of history. It is unclear to what extent Daniel understood the details. It is unlikely he knew many of the specifics involved but rather had an understanding of the general message of the vision itself. Daniel wasn’t given the names of any of the kings that would rise and fall in this vision. It is up to those living afterwards to match the elements of the vision with actual history. Of significance to this study is that we realize that all of the events which were seen in the vision have been fulfilled.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
The last things were revealed to Daniel in the reign of Cyrus. For three whole weeks he mourned and fasted as the result of a revelation to him of a great warfare. At the close of that period there appeared to him, by the side of the great river Hiddekel, a glorious Person. The description, when compared with that of John in Patmos, leaves no doubt that in this chapter we have the account of one of the Christophanies of the Old Testament. So radiant was the revelation that Daniel was reduced to weakness in the presence of it and filled with an overwhelming sense of awe.
While prostrate in the dust, he felt the touch of a hand and was lifted into the position of obeisance and adoration. He who had thus appeared to him and touched him then addressed him in words full of tenderness, bidding him not to fear, declaring that his loyalty to God was known and valued.
The glorious One then proceeded to foretell the history of Daniel’s people in the latter days. There is a touch of mystic wonder about this story as this glorious One speaks of having been with the kings of Persia, of being in conflict with principalities, having dominion over earthly kingdoms, and being helped by a prince Michael, evidently of spiritual nature rather than a material manifestation.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
the Vision by the River
Dan 10:1-21
This chapter gives a glimpse into the great conflict which is always in progress between heaven and hell. For three weeks the radiant Being who came to Daniel as he prayed and fasted by the great river, was withstood by the mighty fallen spirit, who was concerned with the destinies of the kingdom of Persia; and it was only when he was succored and reinforced that he was able to accomplish the divine errand, Dan 10:13. What a revelation is here-that probably each heathen country is ruled by some wicked spirit in the high places; that the fight is at times almost overpowering even for bright unfallen angels; and that the blessings which are ours are sometimes delayed because of the storms that sweep the ocean through which they come. Perhaps by our prayer we are able to throw an ounce-weight into the scale, and turn the battle. How reassuring the touch of that hand and tender the address of that voice. Who cannot be strong when strengthened by the right hand of God? Go forth into the fight of another day! God holds thy right hand. Be true and strong; thou canst not fail!
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
Chapter Ten The Angelic World
The last great prophecy, or revelation, made known to Daniel is detailed for us in chapters 10-12. It is the most detailed of all the prophecies given in the book. It commences with Daniels day and culminates in the ushering in of the kingdom.
It is important to notice that here, as elsewhere in the prophetic Scriptures, it is distinctively Daniels people who are in view (see verse 14). We will find nothing here, nor elsewhere in the Old Testament, about the church of the present dispensation. Misunderstanding this point has caused much confusion in the interpretation of prophecy.
We see from Ezr 1:1 and from Dan 10:1 that two years had elapsed between the time that King Cyrus gave permission to the Jews to return to Jerusalem and the time that Daniel had this vision. He himself was not one of those who returned. He was in a position requiring his attendance to the king, and was an aged man, probably about ninety years old. We see him waiting quietly for the time when he was to leave the world behind, in which he had seen so many changes and upheavals. But his heart was concerned about the remnant of his nation who had gone up to the place of Jehovahs name. We find him in deep grief, deep sorrow of heart-that sorrow of heart which perhaps only those know who, as Daniel, share in the true condition of Gods people. Even those who had gone up to Jerusalem failed from the very beginning in carrying out the mind of God fully. They went up with a measure of enthusiasm and were gathered back to their holy city in ruin, but slothfulness and indifference to Gods glory soon began to eat away at them. Alliances were formed with the strangers surrounding Jerusalem, so that God received very little glory from their returning to the place of His temple and altar.
No doubt Daniel knew and felt all this and his heart was grieved over it. He knew too that those who went up were very few compared with those who remained at ease in the land where their bondage had given place to indifferent toleration. As we see in the book of Esther, they seemed quite content with the measure of liberty they enjoyed; they apparently had no heart for that which had so large a place in the mind of Daniel. He is found bowed before God in deep grief, mourning three full weeks (perhaps better translated, weeks of days; it confirms that to which I called your attention in the previous chapter, regarding the use of the word week). During this time of his mourning he tasted no pleasant bread, flesh, or wine, neither anointed himself at all, until the three whole weeks were fulfilled.
At the end of that time, he was by the great river Hiddekel. Looking up, he saw a certain man clothed in linen, whose loins were girded with fine gold. His body is described as being like the beryl, his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire. His arms and his feet were like polished brass and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude. The description brings to our minds that portrait of the glorified Lord Himself as given in the first chapter of Revelation. It seems evident that this messenger who appeared to Daniel was not really a theophany, but a created angel, because he required the help of Michael in his conflict. When Daniel beheld him, the men who were with him fled to hide themselves; they did not see the vision, but a great quaking fell on them. Left alone in the presence of this majestic being, the prophets strength was turned into weakness. He was on the ground as one in a deep sleep, yet he heard the voice of the angel. A hand was stretched forth that touched him and set him on his knees, though he still had to support himself with the palms of his hands. Then the messenger spoke, saying, O Daniel, a man greatly beloved, understand the words that I speak unto thee, and stand upright: for unto thee am I now sent (11). At this the prophet stood up trembling.
The angel then said:
Fear not, Daniel: for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words. But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia (12-13).
We get a remarkable insight here into the unseen world and the conflict even now being carried on in heavenly places. And may we not find here also the reason why many of our prayers do not seem to be answered when and as we would desire to have them? For three whole weeks Daniel had been before God in earnest supplication; he prayed, he besought, he interceded on behalf of his people, yet no answer had come. Had Daniel ceased praying, he might have given up the object of his prayers and declared that God turned a deaf ear to his petitions. But the angel told him that at the very beginning of his supplication he had been sent from the very throne of God to reveal to Daniel that which would rest his mind in regard to Gods purpose and the final blessing of His people. But for twenty-one days this angel had been fighting his way through the fiends of the upper air. The prince of the kingdom of Persia (not Cyrus himself, but evidently an evil angel delegated by Satan to seek to influence the hearts of the Persian kings against the people of God) had prevented this holy angel of the Lord for twenty-one days. Nor could the divinely sent messenger prevail until Michael, here called one of the chief princes, and in the New Testament the archangel, came to help him.
I grant you that all this is very mysterious. It is something altogether outside of the sphere of human cognizance. We know nothing whatever about the conflicts continuously being carried on in the unseen world except what we can learn from our Bibles. But this much is clear: Here was a man who was praying earnestly on earth, and God had heard that prayer in Heaven. In answer to it He sent an angel, but for three weeks that angel was hindered from reaching Daniel. That hindrance was in the unseen world and by such a power that the archangel himself was needed to overcome it.
I would like to bring a few other Scriptures to your attention that deal with this solemn subject. In the first chapters of the book of Job we find the sons of God presenting themselves before the Lord, and we are told that Satan came also. The sons of God are clearly an order of angelic ministers engaged in carrying out the will of God in connection with this world: He maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fireAre they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation? (Heb 1:7,14) Satan, the foul leader of the evil hosts, walks unabashed among these sons of God. He acts as one who has no fear of rebuke in that company. He comes before the throne of God as the great adversary and accuser of the brethren; he accused Job to the very face of God, and desired to test Jobs faith. The Lord did not deny his demand, but delivered Job into his hands-for Jobs own good, as we know. So we gather from this Scripture that God is able to use even the devil to carry out His own purposes for the blessing of His children. He has not been outwitted by Satan but uses him all through this present time.
In Luk 22:31 we read Jesus words to the apostle Peter: Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat. The devil is the sifter of Gods wheat. The Lord wants His wheat sifted; He does not want a lot of chaff. But when the devil is used to sift Gods wheat and His children are put into the devils sieve, not one grain of the wheat is lost; the devil is simply used by God for the separation of the chaff from the wheat. Do not despair then if, like Job and like Peter, you are put into the devils sieve. It is God Himself who is letting you be sifted like that. He has seen the chaff in your life, and He wants the real to be separated from the false. But I directed your attention to these Scriptures that all might see that good and evil angels alike have direct access to the presence of God.
In 2 Chronicles 18 we have the account of an alliance entered into by Ahab and Jehoshaphat. Ahab was a wicked king, the ruler of the ten tribes. Jehoshaphat was in large measure a man of God; but unhappily he was a man who could not say no. He was of too yielding a character for his own good and the good of the kingdom of Judah over which he ruled. At Ahabs request he had promised to go out to battle to help him against his enemies, but he desired also to consult a prophet of the Lord. Ahab brought in a host of the prophets of Baal who all predicted a glorious victory. This did not satisfy Jehoshaphat, so Micaiah, a prophet of Jehovah imprisoned for his faithfulness, was brought from his dungeon to declare the mind of the Lord. When he came, the king of Israel said, Shall we go to battle? And Micaiah replied ironically, Oh yes, Go ye up, and prosper, and they shall be delivered into your hand (14). But the king detected the tone of irony in his voice, and Ahab adjured him to tell him the truth. At that Micaiah drew aside, as it were, the veil from the other world and declared that he had seen a multitude of spirits surrounding the throne of God. One of these, in obedience to the divine permission, had been sent forth to become a lying spirit in the mouth of Ahabs prophets to seduce the wretched idolatrous king to his destruction. Here again we see the same thing that is brought before us in the book of Job-angels, both good and evil, having access to Heaven.
In the third chapter of Zechariah we have a beautiful picture depicting the same lesson. Joshua the high priest, the representative of the whole nation of Israel, stood before the Lord clothed in filthy garments-a picture of one chosen of God and yet defiled by sin. An adversary is there to accuse him, but the angel of Jehovah is standing by. Who is that mystic angel of Jehovah? It is He of whom Jehovah said, My name is in him (Exo 23:21). He illustrates the Lord Jesus Himself, the messenger of the covenant. What did Jehovah say when Satan attempted to accuse? The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan;is not this a brand plucked out of the fire? (Zec 3:2)
This brings out two things: first, there is Gods sovereign electing grace, and then there is redemption. That is why God could recognize and own the remnant of Israel in spite of their failures. Jehovahs answer to Satan was, I have chosen him. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. But this is based on redemption; He said to those who stood by, Take away the filthy garments from him. And to Joshua He said, Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with change of raiment (4). The presence of the angel of the covenant points on to the cross. At the cross the covenant would be ratified in His precious blood; He became man to suffer death and cleanse from all iniquity those whom He redeemed to Himself. Thus we have full redemption, and the brand plucked out of the fire.
Now let us link this with that important passage in Revelation 12. Remember that it speaks of something that is still future.
There was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night (7-10).
This gives us the end of Satans place as the accuser with access to Heaven. He is driven out by the same Michael who came to the assistance of the angel who spoke to Daniel in our chapter. This event will take place in the midst of the seventieth week as described in Daniel 9. After that no foul spirit will ever have access to the presence of God.
Eph 6:11-12 is a passage of great importance: Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against [wicked spirits in heavenly places] (literal translation). The Christians foes are these wicked spirits; like the prince of the kingdom of Persia, they are ruling the hearts of men in these days of darkness. We are warned against their wiles. The great business of Satan at the present time is to seek to deceive the people of God with things that seem to be in accordance with His mind but which are really deceitful imitations.
When Joshua and the people of Israel entered the land of Canaan, God told them to utterly destroy all the nations that dwelt in it. But the Gibeonites, filled with terror, sent an ambassage to Joshua, pretending to have come from a long distance. By means of their moldy bread, ragged clothes, and worn shoes, they deceived the leaders of Israel into entering into a league with them. Thus the Israelites were misled by not being on their guard against the wiles of the Canaanites. We too will be deceived by the strategies of our great adversary if we are not careful to continuously ask counsel of the Lord. In Ephesians 6 we are told that our warfare is with the world rulers of this darkness. Who are these world rulers? They are not the kings, prime ministers, or presidents of this world. These great and often good men have to do with the temporal government of this world; they are the powers that be, ordained of God. Yet they may be like the little figures on the chessboard in the hands of the real world rulers of this darkness.
In Daniel 10 we learn that the prince of the kingdom of Persia who withstood the angel of the Lord twenty-one days was one of the world rulers of this darkness. The prince of Grecia of verse 20 was another one seeking to influence the hearts of the Grecian rulers against the will of God. On the other hand, notice what Michael is called in the last verse. He is designated as Michael your prince; in chapter 12:1 he is called the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people. Michael the archangel seems to have special care for the people of Israel. Thus, while evil angels were seeking Israels ruin, Michael and his hosts of benevolent angels were protecting their interests.
You will remember how efforts were being made at that very time to thwart Gods purposes concerning the Jews. Sanballat and his companions sought in every way they could to hinder the progress of the work of the Lord at Jerusalem (Nehemiah 4). What was happening on earth was evidently intimately connected with, in fact the result of, what was going on in the upper air. Satan is called the prince of the power of the air; his angelic subordinates and Gods holy angels were warring in connection with the attempt to carry out that which God Himself had planned for His earthly people.
Perhaps the chief of all the world rulers of this darkness is described in Eze 28:11-18. The first ten verses of the chapter concern the prince of Tyre. But from the eleventh verse on we have a very different being, one who is clearly superhuman, designated as the king of Tyre. Of him Ezekiel says:
Thus saith the Lord God; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created. Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee. By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.
Was all this true of any earthly king of Tyre? Surely not. But it was true of the great prince, the unseen ruler, who was leading the kingdom of Tyre to its doom. How readily rulers and nations obey the orders of these malignant spirits; having lost Heaven for themselves, they now seem to find their delight in contriving the rain of mankind! God in His grace is seeking mans blessing and has given His Word and Spirit to guide in paths of righteousness and peace. He has sent forth hosts of unfallen elect angels to influence leaders to prefer justice and holiness to unrighteousness and iniquity. Yet the heart of man is so perverse that in his natural state he is ever ready to be led by the devil.
In the present age our conflict as Christians is said to be with principalities and powers who are not of flesh and blood. This makes it evident that there are degrees in rank among angels, whether fallen or unfallen, as there are in human armies. The special effort of these organized hosts of Hell is now to deceive the people of God by replacing Christ and His truth with other things that would keep Gods people from receiving their blessing. Coupled with this is the effort to hinder exercised souls from coming to the knowledge of the truth at all by imitating that which is of God. Those who seem about to obey the truth are turned aside into the devious mazes of error.
Have you noticed how every precious truth of Scripture has its Satanic counterfeit? It has been so from the very beginning. Scarcely was the glorious gospel of grace proclaimed when the devil introduced men secretly among the assemblies of God whose object was to turn that very grace into lasciviousness. The apostle taught that the Christian was not under law, but grace; the antinomian was almost at his heels to cry, Let us do evil, that good may come. It is the same in our day. Let the precious truth of the indwelling and gifts of the Holy Spirit be declared, and Satan will follow with false gifts and another spirit, leading even earnest souls into the wildest fanaticism. Let the truth of new birth be insisted on, and the devil will raise up teachers after his own heart to tell men that being born again means simply rising out of the self-life into the spiritual, reaching out after the higher ideals, seeking to make that which is highest, noblest and best of ourselves; thus saving ourselves by character (a quotation from a New Theology sermon).
Again, let one begin to preach about the blessed truth of the rapture of the church and the Lords return, and you will have the wicked spirits in heavenly places poisoning mens minds with unscriptural and false conceptions about this solemn and important theme. The second advent then becomes a byword in the minds of some intelligent people and they become sick and tired of the whole thing. But these are just the wiles of the devil against which the believer is warned; we need to be on our guard, remembering the admontion, Prove all things; hold fast that which is good (1Th 5:21).
Thank God, the hosts of the upper air are not all malevolent. You remember at the siege of Dothan, in answer to the prayer of Elisha, the Lord opened the eyes of the prophets servant and he saw the mountains round about full of fiery chariots (2Ki 6:17). The angel of the Lord encampeth round about them that fear him (Psa 34:7). O beloved, we too need opened eyes! Then we would see the angelic host camping around us for our protection and watching over us for good. Thus we would fight on with new courage, clad in the whole armor of God, knowing that the gates of Hell will not prevail against Christs church.
In closing this solemn subject, let me say a word to the unsaved. These wicked spirits of which I have been speaking are determined on your souls damnation. They will use every effort known to hinder your salvation and to seal your doom. How much then you need to learn the lesson that in yourself you have no strength or power; you are a poor, weak, easily-deceived soul led by Satan and imposed on by his wicked hosts. Only One can deliver you from your dreadful foes; that One is the blessed Lord Jesus Christ who died on the cross that through death he might destroy [render powerless, or annul] him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage (Heb 2:14-15). Call on Him and be delivered from the fearful and superhuman enemies who desire your eternal ruin, for it is written that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Let us now, after this long parenthesis, turn back to Daniel 10. In the fourteenth verse the angel tells Daniel that he had come to make him understand what should befall the Jews in the latter days. At this Daniel set his face toward the ground and became dumb. Another angel then drew near and touched his lips. At that point Daniel spoke aloud and said to the glorious being who stood before him, O my lord, by the vision my sorrows are turned upon me, and I have retained no strength. For how can the servant of this my lord talk with this my lord? for as for me, straightway there remained no strength in me, neither is there breath left in me (16-17). The ministering angel touched him again and strengthened him; he told Daniel not to fear but to be strong. At this Daniel asked the revealing angel to continue. He told him that he must return to fight with the prince of Persia, and that when he had gone the prince of Greece would come. But first he was commissioned to show Daniel that which is noted in the scripture of truth (21). This is clearly a record kept, not on earth, but in Heaven. The omniscient God has outlined the events to occur in the kingdoms of men long before they come to pass on earth. This revelation is given to us in Daniel 11.
In the volume of the book it was written of the eternal Son of God, I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart (Psa 40:7-8). Just as every step of Christs journey from the throne of the universe down to the cross of Calvary and back to the throne, even to the ages of ages, was foreknown from before the foundation of the world, so God has foreseen all that is to transpire on this planet in the affairs of men. In the Scripture of truth recorded in Heaven all is ever before His eyes; let Satan and evil men rage as they will, He worketh all things after the counsel of his own will (Eph 1:11).
The Christian heart may surely rest and rejoice in the knowledge that at all times,
God sits as sovereign on His throne,
And ruleth all things well!
Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets
Dan 10:1
There are very few things harder to bear, or more often handles of Satan, than those strangely protracted intervals which so frequently come in between prayers and their answers, between promises and their fulfilments, between good desires and their attainments, between the best-laid schemes and their reasonable success. The truth which I wish to press is this: that the space which intervenes in all these cases, and which seems to us so needless, so severe, is as much settled and predetermined by God as the prayer we offer, or the means we use, or the event itself for which we are looking. The two are parts of the same thing; both are ordained, both are covenanted. The time is an appointed one-not loose-definite; and the one is as certain as the other. Consider one or two of the reasons of God’s mysterious painful dealing about intervals.
I. God will always be a sovereign-not to be questioned, independent of man’s opinions, infinitely beyond man’s judgment, and always crossing the hands of man’s expectations.
II. In heaven there is no time. It is impossible for us to conceive, much less to pronounce on, the action of one to whom all time is one perpetual now. In God’s mind there is never any intermediate period. The prayer, the time after the prayer, the answer, when it comes, are all one-He sees them perfectly identified.
III. It is a rule of God’s government, which you will find pervading every part of it, that everything is made matter of faith before it is made matter of enjoyment.
IV. The discipline is very good and necessary, for it addresses itself to two of our weakest points-our impatience and our pride. The man who wishes to have answers to prayer, must be a man who recognises that God is very kind and that he is very little-he must be a child content to tarry his Father’s leisure-and the sooner, perhaps, that lesson is learnt the sooner will the Father give His child what He has been keeping from him just till he can say it.
J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 7th series, p. 174.
References: Dan 10:11.-G. T. Coster, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xviii., p. 170; W. M. Taylor, Daniel the Beloved, p. 251. Dan 10:18.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxii., No. 1295.
Dan 10:18-19
Who is this that in the presence of the angel is so weak and feeble that for a while he cannot bear even to hear him speak; that he faints and loses speech and sight before him? It is one than whom few nobler, few greater, or more courageous men have ever been. Daniel is a noble example of the good, great man. He had known what it was to be a captive and a prisoner, and a slave. He knew what it was to be a despot’s counsellor and rule half the civilised world; and the one thing which upheld him in his first estate, and guided him to the last, was his clear sense of his own position before God and man; a large wide view of his own being; a clear view of his Master’s earthly claims on him, and overspreading and bounding all other things and thoughts, the fear of God, thorough independence of man, perfect dependence upon God.
I. A strong sense of responsibility is the true source of genuine independence of character. To feel and know what we are, where we are, that we have real duties, and are really answerable in the most minute particulars for doing them, and for our manner of doing them-this constant thought of insight is the mother of all real and lasting independence of character.
II. True independence in nothing differs more from vanity than that it has a sense of weakness, a sense of need, a craving of strength from above. Foolishness is strong in its own sight. The prophet with all his independence of character ruling provinces, standing before kings and reproving them, how did he behave when he was alone with God? Remember his softness and tenderness, his window opened towards his home, and the man in prayer upon his knees three times a day there. Or think of him, as when in my text God’s message came home to him, and he says, “There remained no strength in me.” It was because realities to him were real. Let us pray that we may not live as though the things of sight, touch, and taste were real, heaven and eternity shadows, but that we may feel that God and God’s law alone are real, and that usages, however prevalent, however accepted, which are not after God’s laws, will one day pass away and leave us, if we have trusted them, solitary, helpless, and broken.
Archbishop Benson, Boy Life: Sundays in Wellington College, p. 219.
References: Dan 10:18, Dan 10:19.-J. Vaughan, Sermons, 14th series, p. 13; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. vi., p. 368. Dan 10:19.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xix., No. 1089. 10-Expositor, 3rd series, vol. ii., p. 437; J. G. Murphy, The Book of Daniel, p. 162. 10, 11-W. M. Taylor, Daniel the Beloved, p. 203. Dan 11:31.-W. M. Statham, Christian World Pulpit, vol. iii., p. 257. Dan 11:32.-Spurgeon, Morning by Morning, p. 217. Dan 11:32, Dan 11:33.-Ibid., Sermons, vol. xi., No. 609. Dan 11:36.-Expositor, 3rd series, vol. iv., p. 40. 11-J. G. Murphy, The Book of Daniel, p. 166.
Daniel 12
We have in this chapter:-
I. The hope of the suffering saint. “Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” The doctrine of the resurrection of the dead is here for the first time broadly asserted, and that in such a way as to connect it with retribution, and make it an encouragement to fidelity under trial.
II. We have here, secondly, the reward of the working saint. “They that are wise shall shine,” etc. Among the nations of the earth decorations and honours are given to those who have done the greatest work of destruction. But in the kingdom of Christ it is far otherwise. The places of preeminence under Him are assigned to those who have been likest Him in the holiness of their characters, in the self-sacrifice of their lives, and in the hallowing and ennobling influence which they have shed around them.
III. We have here the rest of the waiting saint. “Go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.” Do not disquiet yourself about the future. Leave that in God’s hands. You shall rest in Him during the remainder of your life on earth, and when that shall end, you shall rest with Him.
W. M. Taylor, Daniel the Beloved, p. 232.
References: Dan 12:4.-A. Mursell, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxv., p. 40; H. W. Beecher, Ibid.; J. F. Stevenson, Ibid., vol. ii., p. 307; H. W. Beecher, Ibid., vol. xxix., p. 291. Dan 12:9.-C. Wordsworth, Old Testament Outlines, p. 262.
Dan 12:13
These words contain undoubtedly the dismission of Daniel from his whole life-work, and may therefore be applied to anyone who has been working well for God, and has now gone to rest.
The text brings before our view:-
I. The majesty and greatness of the providence of God. God says not only to individuals-to each of His servants when he has done his work, “Go thou thy way,” He says it to communities of men and witnesses for the truth. He says it to Churches. He says it to generations. He says it to worlds-to one world after another: “Go thou thy way.” Everything is ruled and used for the accomplishment of His ultimate and perfect will.
II. How little is individual man! Is it not as if with some sublime consciousness of the greatness of His own providence-covering the world, stretching along time, reaching up to heaven, filling at length eternity and infinitude-that God says to Daniel in dismissing him: “But go thou thy way, ‘I have got from thee all the little service I require”?
III. And yet God is mindful of man. He does visit the son of man, talks with him, dwells with him, works in him and works by him, for the accomplishment of His own great purposes. As for those who have loved and served Him, who have been happy in His kingdom, and valiant for His truth on the earth, they will be regarded with a Father’s love and pity. He will deal gently with them. He will hide them beneath the shadow of His wings. He will keep them unto life eternal.
IV. For “thou shalt rest.” To go from earthly labour for God is to go to heavenly rest. Even the earthly part rests in the grave where the weary are at rest. But the better part, sleeping in Jesus, is carried to Paradise, to the stillness of the blessed dead, to the waiting, yet happy and restful, company of sainted souls.
V. This rest at death is preparatory to something far more complete, “at the end of the days.” “Thou shalt stand in thy lot.” Thou shalt rest first, until the night is over, and then stand up in the morning as a man refreshed with sleep. The term “stand” expresses the completeness, and above all the permanence, of the new life.
A. Raleigh, From Dawn to the Perfect Day, p. 401.
These words seem to say to us: The future is wrapped in clouds; much is hidden from your view, and there are many mysteries. “But go thou thy way;” do not hesitate; do not look back; do not measure by results; go thou thine own proper and appointed way. Do thy work, whatever it be, that God has given thee to do; fulfil thy part; execute thy mission; act out thy destiny. “Go thou thy way.”
I. You must first have well ascertained that that way which you are now going to take is “thy way.” This was the point at issue between Christ and Satan. Satan, falsely quoting, said, “In their hands they shall bear thee up,” leaving out the sequel-which was the hinge of the promise-“in all thy ways.” Christ saw the omission, and saw that any venture which was without that condition would be presumptuous, and therefore He answered, “Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.”
II. I know of no comfort in life-I know of no repose greater than this-today, duty; to-morrow, trust; the foot straight in the road, and the eye, looking out for loving ends it cannot see. Therefore go. The clouds will vanish; the light will fall in; God will vindicate Himself; things may explain themselves, and the end will well compensate all thy effort, “Go thou thy way till the end be.”
III. I do not wonder that the very next words are, “thou shalt rest.” There is the soul’s rest; increasing experience of God’s faithfulness, a growing assurance of forgiveness; a greater and greater nearness to Christ; tokens for good; glances of the smile of God-all these will be “rest” even while you are on the road. Nevertheless, that “rest,” sweet as it is, is always a future, running on and on; it is always “Thou shalt.”
J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 10th series, p. 54.
I. The first application from this text shall be this general one: that wisdom is a practical thing. The prophet is telling us what the wise do.
II. If you are wise, when you see souls going the wrong way, the very first thing you will aim to do will be to use the means for turning them. When we look at all the works done under the sun, and compare them with this, there is no work worth talking about but this work of God-the work of turning many to righteousness.
III. If you are wise, you will, in aiming to turn many to righteousness, begin with the young. A very little right, or a very little wrong at the beginning, must make a tremendous difference very often at the end.
IV. If you are wise you will perpetually go to Christ for grace, for God only gives through Christ. (1) The first qualification for this going is pardon. (2) Another qualification is grace. To teach you must touch; to magnetise you must be magnetic. (3) Beyond the qualification of grace there is the gift of teaching. Mere mechanical routine, mere human education, will not do. You want the gift of living in other lives, putting yourself in the position of other persons. You want the gift of the happy word and happy way. (4) Beyond all this, you want power from on high. There are different kinds of power. Intelligence is power; union is power. But there are certain things in the lowest kingdoms of life that all the powers of all the teachers cannot do-they cannot make one primrose grow. And yet we want to do more than this-we want to turn many to righteousness. We must run to Christ, who says, “All power is given unto Me.” Ask for that power; everything else is a cipher without it.
C. Stanford, Penny Pulpit, No. 1033.
References: Dan 12:13.-A. Watson, Sermons for Sundays, Festivals, and Fasts, 2nd series, vol. ii., p. 409; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. xi., p. 151; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. iv., p. 292; J. Ker, Old Testament Outlines, p. 263. 12-J. G. Murphy, The Book of Daniel, p. 199; Expositor, 3rd series, vol. i., pp. 217, 431.
Fuente: The Sermon Bible
CHAPTER 10 The Preparation for the Final Prophecy
This chapter contains the preface to the final great prophecies as found in the last two chapters of this book. The certain man who appeared unto Daniel at the banks of the river Hiddekel (Tigris) was the Lord. Compare with Rev 1:1-20, where John, the beloved disciple, beheld Him in a vision of glory. Daniels vision is a pre-incarnation vision of the same One whom John beheld after His resurrection and in His glorified humanity.
The delayed answer by the angelic messenger is explained by the power of darkness. A powerful demon-prince, a satanic agency, having control over Persia, so that he claimed the title the prince of Persia, kept back the answer. Then the prophet was strengthened.
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
abominations
(Cf) Mat 24:15. The expression occurs three times in Daniel. In; Dan 9:27; Dan 12:11 the reference is to the “Beast,” “man of sin”; 2Th 2:3; 2Th 2:4 and is identical with Mat 24:15. In Dan 11:31 the reference is to the act of Antiochus Epiphanes, the prototype of the man of sin, who sacrificed a sow upon the altar, and entered the holy of holies.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
am 3470, bc 534
Cyrus: Dan 1:21, Dan 6:28, 2Ch 36:22, 2Ch 36:23, Ezr 1:1, Ezr 1:2, Ezr 1:7, Ezr 1:8, Ezr 3:7, Ezr 4:3, Ezr 4:5, Ezr 5:13-17, Ezr 6:3, Ezr 6:14, Isa 44:28, Isa 45:1
whose: Dan 1:7, Dan 4:8, Dan 5:12
and the: Dan 8:26, Dan 11:2, Gen 41:32, Luk 1:20, Rev 19:9
but: Dan 10:14, Dan 12:4, Dan 12:9
long: Heb. great
and he: Dan 1:17, Dan 2:21, Dan 5:17, Dan 8:16, Dan 9:22, Dan 9:23
Reciprocal: Gen 15:1 – in Gen 49:1 – Gather 2Ch 26:5 – had Dan 11:27 – yet Dan 11:29 – time Dan 11:35 – even Hab 2:3 – the vision Eph 1:17 – revelation Tit 1:3 – in 1Pe 1:12 – it
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
AS WE COMMENCE reading chapter 10, we again find mention of ‘weeks’. They are, however, to be distinguished from the ‘weeks’ we have just been considering, since a note in the margin of our Bibles indicates that in the Hebrew they are ‘weeks of days’. For those weeks Daniel was mourning and fasting, though the reason for this is not stated.
At the end of chapter 1, we were told that Daniel continued to the first year of Cyrus: what we are about to consider occurred in the third year of Cyrus, so Daniel was now an old man and very near the end of his remarkable career. Our chapter furnishes us with details preparatory to the prophetic revelations made in Dan 11:1-45 and Dan 12:1-13. They are very instructive, as showing us the way in which angelic beings may act as ‘ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation’ (Heb 1:14).
Verses Dan 10:5-9, describe the angelic visitation and the effect it had upon Daniel. We may remark that uniformly when angelic beings assume a form visible to human eyes, they appear as men. Nevertheless that which is supernatural marks them, reminding the one who sees them of the presence of God. It was so on this occasion, and the description given in verse Dan 10:6 reminds us of John’s description of his Lord, as recorded in Rev 1:14, Rev 1:15. Yet the angel here was not the Lord, as verse Dan 10:13, we think, makes plain. Still it put Daniel on his face and prostrate.
There is also a resemblance between this scene and what took place at the conversion of Saul of Tarsus. Then his companions saw the light but did not hear the words that were spoken though they heard the sound. Here the men with him saw nothing but they were filled with trembling, and fled to hide themselves. Fallen man cannot stand in the presence of God, and even a saint – whether Daniel in the Old Testament or John in the New – falls down ‘in a deep sleep’, or ‘as one dead’. We know God as our Father, but we must never forget His supreme majesty as God.
In the first year of Darius, Daniel was addressed as a man ‘greatly beloved’, as we saw in the last chapter. We have now come to the third year of Cyrus, and again he is thus addressed twice, showing he had not forfeited the earlier description. And why was this, seeing that so often saints backslide, and do not maintain the life of godliness? The answer, we think, is found in verse Dan 10:12. In his devoted life Daniel had maintained two things.
In the first place he had set his heart to understand. How often is this lacking amongst us today! Is it our fervent desire to understand what God has revealed, not with the head only, but with the heart? Daniel loved his God, and loved his people, so that what God made known deeply affected him. If love were more fervent with us, we should be setting our hearts to understand the truth made known to us.
In the second place he ‘chastened’, or ‘humbled’ himself before God, while he sought the understanding. Here again we have to challenge ourselves. It is fatally easy to desire a large understanding of Divine truth because it confers a certain prominence and importance upon the person who possesses it. In reality all truth, if apprehended in the heart, humbles us. This is exemplified in the Apostle Paul. Writing of God’s great thoughts as to the church in Eph 3:1-21, he is ‘less than the least of all saints’. In 2Co 12:1-21, after telling how he had been caught up into Paradise, and heard unspeakable things, he says, ‘though I be nothing’. Did we chasten ourselves more truly before God, we should soon have a larger understanding of His truth.
Verses Dan 10:12-13 show that answers to our prayerful desires may be delayed by adverse powers in the unseen world. Satan has his angels, and it appears that some may be deputed by him to hinder God’s work in certain kingdoms. The prince of the kingdom of Persia, who withstood the holy angel speaking to Daniel, was doubtless a fallen angelic being. Michael, elsewhere called the archangel, came to help him. The first verse of Dan 12:1-13 shows us that Michael is specially commissioned to act on behalf of the children of Israel, and hence he intervened on this occasion. In the last verse of our chapter he is called, ‘your prince’.
In the angelic world there was also ‘the prince of Grecia’, as verse Dan 10:20 shows; but in spite of these adverse powers the messenger of God had come to Daniel, and lifting him up had strengthened him to receive the communication that God was now sending him. Conflict in the angelic realm had still to take place with the princes of Persia and Grecia – the empire that was presently to overthrow the Persian empire – but the instruction of this humble and devoted servant of God took precedence, as to time, over even that.
He had come to show Daniel, ‘that which is noted in the Scripture of Truth’. He spoke as if it had already been so noted, but we may indeed thank God that it has been noted in the Bible – the Scripture of Truth – which we hold in our hand and can read today. What was thus conveyed to Daniel is noted in the chapters that follow, and as we read them we shall see that some things revealed have already taken place, and some remain to be fulfilled, as we have just seen in the prophecy of the seventy weeks. What has been so accurately fulfilled assures us that the important things, that remain to be fullfilled, will all take place with equal accuracy in their season.
Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary
Dan 10:1. When giving a date for any event, a reference to either Darius or Cyrus is the same, Tiiis is because the MedoPersian Empire was ruled jointly by the two men, hence they may he used interchangeably for dates since they took possession of Babylon together as far as chronology was concerned. The preceding chapter began with the first year while the present one comes down to the third year of the same reign. This verse is com posed in the third person and Daniel writes it only as a historian. True, hut . . . long signifies that an inspired prophecy is not weakened any as to its reliability just because it looks far into the future. God knows as much about the future as he does of the past, hence an inspired prediction cannot fail.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
A GREAT WARFARE
Note the late date of this prophecy (Dan 10:1), and the different rendering of a phrase in the Revised Version, where even a great warfare is substituted for the time appointed was long. As the unveiling of the lesson will show, this phrase is an appropriate title for it.
Note the physical and spiritual preparation of the prophet for the revelation that follows (Dan 10:2-4), a condition into which he had doubtless brought himself by prayer. Had he been seeking of heaven an explanation of the previous mysteries especially that of the ram and the he-goat? This seems probable, because what follows traverses so much of the ground of chapter 8.
Dan 10:5-9 bear so strong a resemblance to the description of the Son of Man in Rev 1:12-17 as to suggest that it also is a Christophany, or manifestation of the Second Person of the Trinity. But this does not necessarily mean that it is He who touches and speaks to the prophet in the verses succeeding.
MYSTERIES OF SATANS KINGDOM
Dan 10:10-14 are full of mystery, yet note first, the appreciation of Daniel in the heavenly courts (Dan 10:11); and then the testimony to the potency of prayer (Dan 10:12). But who is the prince of the Kingdom of Persia (Dan 10:13)? Doubtless a spirit of eminence in the kingdom of darkness, to whose control Satan has committed the earthly affairs of Persia (compare
Eph 4:12). This interpretation seems confirmed by the reference to Michael, elsewhere known as the archangel, and who in the kingdom of light is the special guardian of Israel (Dan 10:21; Dan 12:1; Jud 1:9 : Rev 12:7). What mighty power must Satan possess as judged by this verse, but what a relief to know that there is One stronger than he! Note in the conclusion of this section that the revelation now to be given chiefly concerns what we identify as the end period, the last seven years (Dan 10:14).
INTERVENING EVENTS (Dan 11:1-35)
Passing over the effect on the prophet, we come to the revelation of what shall take place between his time and that of Antiochus Epiphanes, with whom we were made acquainted in an earlier chapter.
The three kings of Dan 11:2 were Cyrus, Ahasuerus (Cambyses) and Darius Hystaspes). The fourth king was Xerxes (see Ezr 4:5-24). The mighty king (Dan 11:3) was Alexander the Great, while the next verse tells once more of the division of his kingdom at his death among his four generals.
Two of these kingdoms of the four now come into prominence, Egypt and Syria (Dan 11:5-6), as those most closely related to Israel in their subsequent history. The kings daughter (Dan 11:6) was Bernice, offspring of Ptolemy 2, who married Antiochus Theous of Syria, but was subsequently poisoned by him. Dan 11:7-9 refer to her brother Ptolemy Energetes of Egypt. Dan 11:9 is a mistranslation, and refers to the king of the north (RV), whose sons (Dan 11:10) were nevertheless overcome by the Egyptian king, Ptolemy Philopater (Dan 11:11), who became weakened at length through licentious living (Dan 11:12).
We have now reached the period of about 200 B.C., when Syria, after many vicissitudes, turns the tide of battle in her favor under the leadership of one known as Antiochus the Great. He entered the Holy Land in the course of his campaign (Dan 11:13-16), treating it considerately, however, as the Jews had been his allies. The last part of Dan 11:16 is an incorrect rendering and should be compared with the Revised Version. Later he made another effort to get possession of Egypt, the working out of his plan including a treaty engagement, and the espousal of his daughter, Cleopatra, to the Egyptian king, but the scheme did not succeed (Dan 11:17). Why the Cleopatra in this case is called the daughter of the women is not clear, but some suppose it to be because she was but a child and under the tutelage of both her mother and grandmother. Dan 11:18-19 speak of a contest with the Romans into which he unsuccessfully entered, and of his subsequent death.
ANTIOCHUS EPIPHANES
The brief reign of Seleucus Philopater (187-176 B.C.) is depicted in Dan 11:20, and then we come upon Antiochus Epiphanes, whose story continues through Dan 11:35. Vile is contemptible in the Revised Version. This man was a younger son of Antiochus the Great, to whom the kingdom did not by right belong, but who stole the hearts of the people as Absalom did from David. He is the little horn of chapter 8, and as we have seen, forerunner of the greater little horn of the end period. Of his atrocities against Israel and the holy city and temple we read in the books of the Maccabees.
The ships of Chittim (Dan 11:30) are a Roman fleet whose power put an end to his victories in Egypt. Returning north, angry in his defeat, he committed those base things against Judea of which mention has been made and which are foretold again in Dan 11:30-35. Apostate Jews sympathized with and aided him, as their successors will do in the case of his successor at the end period; but there were faithful ones under the lead of the Maccabees who valiantly resisted him (Dan 11:32). It was a period of testing of Israel, out of whose fires they came forth much purified.
QUESTIONS
1. When was the prophecy revealed to Daniel?
2. How was he prepared for it?
3. What illustration of the law of recurrence is seen in this lesson?
4. Who presumably is the man referred to in Dan 11:5?
5. Who is meant by the prince of Persia?
6. What relation does Michael bear to Israel?
7. Name the four kings of Persia referred to in Dan 12:2.
8. What does this lesson reveal about Antiochus Epiphanes?
Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary
Dan 10:1. In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia That is, the third after the death of Darius. Daniel must now have been above ninety years of age. It is reasonable to suppose that, being a youth when he was carried captive, he must have been at least twenty years of age; and that was seventy-three years before the date of this vision, which was the last Daniel saw, and it is not likely he himself survived it long. A thing was revealed unto Daniel A revelation of future things (namely, those contained in the two following chapters, to which this is as it were a preface) was made to Daniel. And the thing was true Or plain, as the word truth, or true, is sometimes taken in the Hebrew. The meaning seems to be, that the things were not revealed to him enigmatically, or symbolically, under the types of a statue, or wild beasts, as they were before; but as it were by an historical recital, and with more particular circumstances than before. It is the usual method of the Holy Spirit, to make the latter prophecies explanatory of the former; and revelation is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day. The four great empires of the world, which were shown to Nebuchadnezzar in the form of a great image, were again more particularly represented to Daniel in the shape of four great wild beasts. In like manner, the memorable events which were revealed to Daniel, in the vision of the ram and the he-goat, are here again more clearly and explicitly revealed, in this last vision, by an angel; so that this latter prophecy may not improperly be said to be a comment upon, and explanation of, the former. But the time appointed was long That is, the time when the things revealed were to come to pass, was at a great distance; and consequently, says Bishop Newton, the prophecy must extend further than from the third year of Cyrus to the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, which was not above three hundred and seventy years. In reality, adds he, it comprehends many signal events after that time to the end of the world. And he understood the thing, &c. He had a clear view of the succession of the Persian and Grecian monarchies, and of the series of the kings of Syria and Egypt under the latter of them; although the remaining parts of the vision were obscure, especially with respect to their final event: see chap. Dan 12:8.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Dan 10:1. In the third year of Cyrus, reckoned from the time that he occupied Babylon, in which he governed as viceroy for his uncle Darius. The first year of Cyrus therefore, mentioned in Dan 1:1, must be reckoned from the time that he ascended the Persian throne.
Dan 10:5-6. Behold, a certain man, clothed in linen, as Ezekiel had described him in Eze 9:2. This was the dress of the priest, as appears from Exo 28:42. Lev 6:10. He had a zone of the gold of Uphaz (Africa) round his waist, the girdle of a king united with the holy office of the priest. His body was like beryl, blazing with a flame of glory, as seen by Eze 1:16. Exo 28:20. His eyes were as lamps of fire, coinciding with Rev 1:15. His face was as the appearance of lightning, shining with the majesty of God, as the electric fluid from east to west: he shone with glory like the sun. His feet were like polished brass, fused in the furnace. His voice like the brake of the sea in time of tempest.
Who was this One, this peculiar man? Here our arians and socinians are all at work. He was an angel; he was Gabriel; he was Michael, who appeared as a man!We leave them, and follow the faithful, for the text says he was a man. In Pooles synopsis of the biblical critics we are told, that this One, this Holy One, was the Christ, clothed in all the glory of his regal and priestly costume, never assumed by any angel, except the Angel of the covenant. This is farther apparent from the prostration of Daniel before the glory of his Majesty; and from a collation of this passage with Rev 1:13, and Dan 12:6-7, where Christ disclosed the secrets of the covenant, and uplifted the curtains of the latter day.
Dan 10:11. Oh Daniel, a man greatly beloved; a man dear to God, a very desirable man. The Hebrew chemdoth is the same as Hag 2:7. The plural is often applied to an individual. He bears this name of the Saviour, because he resembled him in prayers, in tears, and in zeal for the advancement of religion and truth.
Dan 10:13; Dan 10:20. The prince of Persia withstood meI will return to fight with the prince of Persia. Who is this prince, but the same that our Saviour calls the prince of this world. Joh 12:31; Joh 19:30. By these battles we must not understand a literal fight, ascribed to the gods by Homer and by Milton; but like Paul, a wrestling with principalities and powers, and with the rulers of the darkness of this world. Some however understand by the prince of Persia Cambyses, who had scruples about signing the edict for the emancipation of the jews.
REFLECTIONS.
What a view is here exhibited of the glorious person of Christ, of Christ full of zeal for his Fathers house. Daniels piety was great, but nothing in comparison with Daniels celestial Comforter. What assurance did he bring to the fainting prophet! Oh Daniel, greatly beloved, fasting, weeping, praying for twenty three days, and fearing that thy tears only watered the ground, and that thy sighs failed of reaching heaven. I say to thee, that thy prayers were heard from the very first, and I would have come to thee twenty one days ago, but the clashing of courtly interests occasioned delays. Now, I come on a mission of great joythe edict of emancipation is signed: thy city and temple shall rise again.
How good to weep and pray for the desolations of the sanctuary to be repaired. God inspires us to cry in the time of trouble, and to plead for promised mercies that we may rejoice. The severity of Daniels exercises, accompanied with fastings at the age of ninety years, mark the intensity of his desires. His soul could not forget the bitter woes of Zion. What a model for christians in barren places, and in distant lands.
God administers to his afflicted people the sweetest cup of consolation after deep sorrow. The Redeemer approached his servant in visions, and so sensible were the signs of his presence, that the prophets attendants felt the power, as was the case with those that attended Paul to Damascus. What a view of providence over the church! Angels and archangels are in attendance, watchers that never sleep. Fear not, thou afflicted and long- tossed of the tempest; the Lord shall comfort Zion. I will lay thy stones with fair colours, and thy foundations with sapphires, gems of beauty and brilliant blue. The monarchies of the earth shall perish, but the church shall flourish, as the everlasting kingdom of the Lord.
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Daniel 10. Introduction to the Final Vision.The last three chapters of Daniel form a unity and describe the final vision. Daniel 10 is introductory. A shining being appears to Daniel near the great river and tells him that he has been sent in answer to his prayers. The guardian angel of Persia had tried to intercept him, but Michael the protector of Israel had come to his assistance.
Dan 10:1. third year of Cyrus: 535 B.C, the latest date in the Book.
Dan 10:4. the great river: elsewhere (cf. Gen 15:18) the Euphrates is described in this way, and as the Hiddekel, i.e. the Tigris, was 50 miles from Babylon, Charles thinks the name of the river is an interpolation.
Dan 10:5. gold of Uphaz: the word Uphaz occurs only in Jer 10:9, and no place of this name is known. Most scholars think that the word is a corruption of the more familiar Ophir.
Dan 10:6. beryl: LXX reads, chrysolite, i.e. the topaz. Compare with the description of the angel here that of the risen Christ in Revelation 1.
Dan 10:13. the prince of the kingdom of Persia: prince is not here the title of an earthly ruler, but refers to the guardian angel (Isa 24:21 f.*). Each nation was supposed to have its own guardian angel, so also in the phrase, one of the chief princes, i.e. one of the chief guardian angels (Isa 24:21*, Mat 18:10*).remained with the kings: Charles adopts an emendation which makes much better sense, I left him alone there with the prince of the kings of Persia.
Dan 10:16. like the similitude: i.e. an angel in the form of a man.
Dan 10:20. prince: guardian angel, as in Dan 10:13.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
PREPARATION FOR DIVINE COMMUNICATIONS
Daniel 10
The last three chapters form one complete section of the Book of Daniel, presenting a forecast of historical facts relating to the dealings of the Gentile powers with God’s earthly people from the time of the Persian monarchy until their final deliverance under the reign of Christ.
Dan_10to11:1 is introductory, giving the circumstances under which Daniel received these final communications.
Daniel 11: presents a prophetic outline of events which take place in connection with the kings of the countries north and south of the holy land.
Daniel 12: foretells God’s dealings with the faithful remnant of the Jews when the nation passes through the great tribulation of the three and a half years that precede the Kingdom of Christ.
Daniel 10 tells us the time when Daniel received these communications, the state of his soul, and the circumstances under which they were made.
(V. 1). These things were revealed to Daniel in the third year of Cyrus, king of Persia. From Ezr 1:1 we know that in the first year of this king a decree was made setting the Jews free to return to their land. Evidently, Daniel had not taken advantage of this decree, for, in the second year of Cyrus, he is still found by the river Hiddekel in the land of Assyria. Here the solemn truth is revealed to Daniel that, not withstanding the partial return from captivity, there still awaits his people “the appointed time of trial” (N. Tn.), and that this sad time will be long.
(Vv. 2, 3). Though Daniel remained in the land of captivity, he was by no means indifferent to the condition of God’s people. This is clearly seen by the state of his soul. For full three weeks he mourned and fasted from flesh and wine. Nature might have seen in the partial return a revival amongst God’s people, and a fresh start in their spiritual history that called for exultation, feasting and rejoicing. The man of God, however, feels the sorrowful past of God’s people, their present weakness, even if free to return to the land, and, above all, foresees the further sorrows that await them before they reach their final deliverance. Amongst those who returned, we know indeed that the younger generation “shouted with a great shout,” but the ancient men “wept with a loud voice” (Ezr 3:12). In like spirit the aged Daniel mourns in the land of captivity.
Well for God’s people if every gracious revival among them were made the occasion for confession and mourning remembering that there will be no full and final deliverance until Christ comes. In every true revival the people of God, if led by the Spirit, will be marked by prayer and confession, rather than by shouting and exultation. The more noise and display the less there is of God in any movement among His people.
Moreover, this right condition of soul prepares Daniel for the communications he is about to receive. One has truly said, “What greater mistake can be made than to suppose that we can enter into God’s secrets without a moral preparedness of heart, or to think that it is possible to understand divine things merely through hearing or reading, or because we have ranged ourselves round certain leaders of God’s people, and enthusiastically upheld their teachings? Humiliation and fasting were Daniel’s means of receiving these revelations; and so now, it is only when we are morally outside of things here – outside of the gratification of the senses and joys of earth, having thoroughly chastened ourselves, through the application of the cross, in the presence of God – that the Spirit of God enlightens the eyes of our hearts to comprehend God’s mind and will.”
(Vv. 4-6). Daniel, being in a right condition of soul to receive communications from God, has a wonderful vision of a glorious angelic being, by whom God will communicate His mind. He sees the angel, not as having assumed some simple garb in order to appear to man, but in his own angelic glory, setting forth his majesty, holiness and power as a divine messenger.
(Vv. 7-11). We are then told the effect of the vision upon Daniel and his companions. The men that were with Daniel saw not the vision, but they felt the presence of this celestial being and, filled with terror, fled to hide themselves. Daniel left alone in the presence of the angel, is overcome with fear, and falls upon the ground, finding relief in deep sleep. In this position the hand of the angel touches him and he is set upon his knees and the palms of his hands. The angel then speaks, assuring Daniel that he is greatly beloved, and he is made to stand upright though trembling. He is thus set at liberty in the presence of this heavenly being to hear communications from God.
(V. 12). Before unfolding to Daniel the special truths he had been sent to communicate, the angel lifts the veil that hides the unseen from the seen and, in a unique passage, gives us a glimpse of the activities of spiritual beings, whether good of evil, that lie behind so much that takes place m man’s world. One has said, “If there are conflicts upon earth, they flow from higher conflicts – the angels contending with these evil beings, the instruments of Satan, who constantly seek to thwart the counsels of God with regard to the earth.”
We know that in a special way the angels are the guardians of the Lord’s people, “sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation” (Heb 1:14). Here we further learn that they are the executors of God’s will behind all His providential dealings amongst men; and in carrying out their commission, they are opposed by wicked spiritual beings.
We have, moreover, in this scene the comforting assurance that God is not indifferent to the exercises and prayers of His people. From the first moment that Daniel set his heart to understand the mind of God, and to chasten himself before God, his prayer was heard. We may fret against others, and declaim against their evil, but if our prayers are to be effectual we need like Daniel to chasten ourselves in the presence of God.
In answer to these exercises the angel had been sent to assure Daniel that he is greatly beloved, to comfort him in his sorrow, and to instruct him in the mind of God.
(V. 13). Though Daniel’s prayer had been heard on the first day that he had poured out his soul before God, the answer to his prayer had been delayed three weeks. The angel intimates the reason for this delay. There were spiritual antagonistic forces at work. For three weeks the prince of the kingdom of Persia had withstood the angel sent to answer Daniel’s prayer. The prince of the kingdom of Persia is evidently a spiritual being. In this verse, Michael, the Archangel, is referred to as “one of the chief princes,” and in the last chapter as “the great prince.”
Scripture clearly intimates that in the spiritual realm there are good principalities and powers as well as those that are evil (Eph 1:21; Eph 6:12, etc.): and that even as God has deputed certain angelic beings, under the direction of an angelic prince, to guard His people, so Satan has evil spiritual powers, under an arch-enemy, deputed to carry out his opposition to God among the nations of the world.
In this particular conflict between spiritual powers, Michael, one of the chief angelic princes, had come to help the angel sent to Daniel. This conflict with Satan’s emissary deputed to oppose God’s work in the kingdom of Persia had detained the angel with the kings of Persia.
(V. 14). This conflict of spiritual powers being ended, the angel comes to Daniel and informs him that he is sent to make Daniel understand what shall befall his people – the Jews – in the latter days, and emphasises the fact that the vision is yet for many days.
In the course of these communications we shall find that many events are foretold that have already had their fulfilment, but their importance lies in their connection with the future, and the way in which they lead up to the manifestation of the Antichrist and the great tribulation of the last days.
(Vv. 15-19). Overcome by the greatness of these communications made by such a glorious being, Daniel feels his own unworthiness and impotence. He bows his face in humbleness and is dumb. He is, however, sustained by an angelic being in the similitude of a man who touches his lips. He is thus emboldened to speak and own that the vision had filled him with sorrow, left him utterly weak, with a sense of his own unworthiness to converse with this heavenly messenger.
Again the angel touches him, imparting to him strength, assuring him that personally he is greatly beloved, that he has no need to fear, filling him with the peace of God, and exhorting him to be strong. Daniel, having thus poured out his soul before God, has the peace of God poured into his heart (See Php 4:6-7). The result is that Daniel is strengthened and can say to the angel. “Let my lord speak; for thou hast strengthened me.”
(Vv. 20-11: 1). From this point Daniel becomes a listener. The angel informs him that he is about to return to fight with the Satanic angelic princes of Persia and Greece. Before taking up this fresh conflict with spiritual evil, he will reveal to Daniel that which is set down in the Scripture of truth. The revelations of chapters 11 and 12 have been noted in Scripture for our benefit.
Daniel is assured that Michael, one of the chief princes, is the spiritual prince deputed to guard the interests of God’s earthly people. The angel sent to Daniel had already been used to confirm and strengthen Darius the Mede. This statement may throw great light on the fact that Darius was so favourable to Daniel (See Dan 6:14-28). In Daniel 6 we have the outward history: in Daniel 10 and Dan 11:1 we see the spiritual conflict behind the history. We now learn that the hostility of the enemies of Daniel was the outcome of spiritual wickedness working behind the scenes, even as the favour shown to Daniel by Darius was the result of the king being confirmed and strengthened by God’s angelic messenger, however little either the enemies of Daniel or his friends were aware of the activities of these spiritual beings.
Fuente: Smith’s Writings on 24 Books of the Bible
10:1 In the {a} third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing [was] true, but the time appointed [was] {b} long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision.
(a) He notes this third year, because at this time the building of the temple began to be hindered by Cambyses, Cyrus’s son, when the father made war in Asia minor against the Scythians, which was discouraging to the godly, and fearful to Daniel.
(b) Which is to declare that the godly should not hasten too much, but patiently abide the fulfilment of God’s promise.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
1. Daniel’s preparation to receive the vision 10:1-11:1
This section can be divided into seven parts.
The background of the vision 10:1
The third year of Cyrus’ rule as king over Babylon was 536 B.C. Cyrus had begun ruling over Persia in 558 B.C., but Daniel’s and the other biblical writers’ interest in Cyrus was as ruler over Babylon, which he conquered in 539 B.C. (Dan 5:31). Cyrus had issued his decree allowing the Jews to return to their land and to rebuild their temple in 538 B.C. Some of them had departed that same year under Zerubbabel’s leadership. They had reinstituted the sacrifices by 537 B.C. (Ezr 3:6), and by 536 B.C. they had begun to rebuild the temple (Ezr 3:8). Daniel would have been in his 80s in 536 B.C., and his age may account for his not returning to the Promised Land. Daniel remained in government service until the first year of Cyrus (538 B.C., Dan 1:21), but he remained in Babylon for several additional years, perhaps in "retirement."
Critics have attacked the Book of Daniel because, they claim, the title "Cyrus king of Persia" was not a contemporary way of referring to him. [Note: E.g., Montgomery, p. 405.] However, this would have been a perfectly legitimate way of referring to this king unofficially, if not officially. [Note: Young, p. 223. See also R. D. Wilson, "The Title ’King of Persia’ in the Scriptures," Princeton Theological Review 15 (1917):90-145.] Perhaps Daniel’s Babylonian name appears again here to assure the reader that this was the same Daniel whom we met in preceding chapters (cf. Dan 1:7). He was the Daniel who had unusual skill in understanding visions and dreams (Dan 1:17).
The message that came to Daniel was a revelation from God that included a vision. The emphasis on "message" in this verse may indicate that, in contrast to the preceding visions, this one came primarily as a spoken message, perhaps again from an angel. Daniel claimed that the message was true and that it involved a revelation of great conflict to come. The AV translation "the time appointed was long" has less linguistic support, but the message did involve prophecy yet far distant in the future. Daniel apparently understood this vision better than he had some of the earlier ones (e.g., Dan 8:27). This verse as a whole prepares the reader for the revelation itself, which has major significance.
"The revelation in the vision given to Daniel on this occasion shattered any hope the prophet might have had that Israel would enjoy her new freedom and peace for long." [Note: Pentecost, "Daniel," p. 1365.]