The Book of Daniel

Michael Segal, “Interpreting History in Qumran Texts,” in M. Kister, M. Segal, and R. Clements (eds.), The Religious Worldviews Reflected in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Symposium of the Orion Center for the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature (STDJ 127; Leiden: Brill, 2018), 212–244.

Nazzareno Marconi-David Micheletti-Alessio Fifi, L'uomo dei desideri. Daniele il profeta che parla ai giovani, Porziuncola, Assisi 2019.

Il testo di David Micheletti - già docente di “Lingua e Pensiero Ebraico” presso L’Università di Perugia; di “Ebraismo: Testi e Movimenti” presso l’Istituto Teologico di Assisi - va letto d'un fiato. L'autore ritorna, all'inizio, al contesto storico in cui nasce il libro di Daniele, ovvero quello di una globalizzazione - una forzata assimilazione alla mentalità e alla cultura greca - che verrà chiamata Ellenismo. Si sofferma, poi, però, sui mostri che compaiono nel racconto apocalittico.
Uno di questi mostri assume tratti molto attuali. Riferendosi a un versetto della Lettera di Paolo ai Romani, che cita un testo del profeta Isaia, «E come predisse Isaia: Se il Signore degli eserciti non ci avesse lasciato una discendenza, saremmo divenuti come Sòdoma e resi simili a Gomorra» (Rm 9,29), spiega che il peccato di Sodoma - ancor prima dell’abuso che ne seguirà - è anzitutto quello della non accoglienza degli ospiti, degli stranieri che sono arrivati nella città (cf. Gen 19). E infatti commenta Micheletti: «Se non si crede al seme di Dio allora tutto diviene Sodoma. E cosa è Sodoma se non il disumano stupro dell'ospitalità alla quale non viene riconosciuto alcunché di sacro?». LEllenizzazione forzata voluta da una delle bestie di cui si parla nel libro di Daniele, il re Antioco IV, altro non è che un mancato riconoscimento del valore dell'altro, anche quando è differente da noi.
Se vogliamo, è lo stesso problema che papa Francesco segnala, questa volta trattando di temi riguardanti la salvaguardia del creato in  una enciclica dedicata alla cura della casa comune, a proposito della perdita di biodiversità. Essa preoccupa per ragioni che hanno a che fare con la sopravvivenza del pianeta, scrive Francesco, riferendosi alla «perdita di specie che potrebbero costituire nel futuro risorse estremamente importanti, non solo per l'alimentazione, ma anche per la cura di malattie e per molteplici servizi», ed è però un grave danno per un'altra e principale ragione: «Non basta pensare alle diverse specie solo come eventuali "risorse" sfruttabili, dimenticando che hanno un valore in sé stesse » (Laudato si', 32-33). Potrà sembrare ardito, ma la non accoglienza dell'altro è in fondo mancanza di accoglienza del valore che ha la differenza nelle relazioni.
Così, se nella Bibbia si parla di mostri come il Leviatano o il Behemot - che pure sono creature di Dio - le bestie del libro di Daniele invece sono disumane, spiega David Micheletti, sono contro il Creatore e quindi contro l'uomo. Per fortuna, ci dice il libro di Daniele, ci sono anche gli angeli, che svolgono un ruolo determinante in questo libro - e nella storia dell'umanità - per svelare i misteri di Dio che non si vedono a una lettura superficiale di quan o accade nel mondo. Gli angeli, scrive Micheletti, aiutano anche ad "aggiornare" il computo di anni che mancano ancora al cessare delle sofferenze e delle prove a cui è sottoposto il popolo di Dio.
Finalmente, Micheletti ci lascia gustare, a partire da una delle più belle definizioni del giovane del nostro libro, quella di "uomo dei desideri", la figura di Daniele. Un giovane che vive anche un'esperienza di solitudine di fronte ai misteri e ai drammi che egli deve contemplare, e davanti ai quali non piò porsi come gli antichi profeti, che risolvevano la questione del male invitando i malvagi a pentirsi e Israele a convertirsi. Nella visione apocalittica della storia, invece - scrive Micheletti - si deve attendere che un Altro, il Figlio dell'uomo, venga a liberarci. In tutto questo, non può mancare un confronto con i giovani della presente generazione, quella segnata non dalla globalizzazione ellenistica, ma pur sempre da una globalizzazione culturale, che rischia, scrive l'autore, di sconvolgere ancor più che in passato la mente dei giovani.

Prof. Giulio Michelini (ofm), ITA

This article explores the various ways in which Daniel 2 reconfigures Genesis 41. Though many scholars have noted similarities between these two texts, such observations have not generated significant advances in our understanding of Daniel 2. 1 John J. Collins lists some of the similarities between Daniel and Joseph, yet he downplays any significant relationship between the two texts. 2 Though I agree with Collins that Daniel "has its own new hero in a different situation," I do not see why such a statement necessarily precludes reading Daniel 2 as an attempt

In Amanda W. Benckhuysen’s invaluable work, she introduces women interpreters’ forgotten voices. Benckhuysen unveils the women’s forgotten counter readings of biblical texts that, as traditionally interpreted, had negatively affected women’s lives. As Benckhuysen concludes, “If this history of interpretation on Genesis 1–3 has taught us anything, however, it is that we need both men’s and women’s perspectives to help us gain a deeper understanding of the truth.” This book is especially helpful for readers who are interested in pursuing the many questions about the roles of women and men in the home and society and about why women’s voices, in particular, were often silenced. Benckhuysen’s The Gospel According to Eve is a very informative and educative resource that both women and men will benefit from reading.

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

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

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

This thesis will be an original contribution to Old Testament studies, for although commentators have written extensively on the book of Daniel, few books, if any, have been published on this focused topic of his prayers. This thesis will be an attentive study on the historical figure of the Old Testament, Daniel, with practical theological implications and application in the study of his prayers, which have been recorded and preserved for the church.
Daniel demonstrated, and preserved for the church, two powerful prayers, which are appropriate for study and imitation for saints of every era. This thesis will validate that proposition through a study of Daniel’s prayers from chapters 2 and 9 in the book of Daniel. It will explore the historical context of Daniel himself and his placement on the world stage. It will continue with an in-depth, exegetical look at both prayers and their various facets, as well as tie them to the Scriptural background, parallel passages, and other passages to which may have been more subtly alluded. Additionally, this thesis will draw a connection to the practical implications of his prayers, and how they impacted those around him intimately and nationally. It will conclude with practical implications for the modern believer.

This article presents a new structural analysis of the Daniel narratives in Chapters 1–6. This structure is based on a new reading of the Daniel narratives from a perspective that emphasizes the tension between earthly and divine rule. Shifting the limelight from the conflict between the Jew and his environment to the internal identity conflict burdening the Jewish courtier, caught between his loyalty to God and that to the king, sheds new light on the Daniel narratives in general and specifically on the status of Daniel 1.

This pericope serves as the prologue to the last and longest of the apocalyptic narratives recorded by Daniel.  Daniel 10-12 should be read as a single unit with a prologue (10:1-11:2a), a revelation (11:2b-12:4), and an epilogue (12:5-13). The narrative flows from an epiphany to Daniel, to a predictive journey from the Persian Empire to the fall of Seleucids and concludes with a reassuring eschatological announcement.

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

The first part of the article demonstrates the case for the existence of a distinct concept of Time in apocalyptic literature and in the writings of the Yahad. The second part addresses the force of the ‘here and now’ in these two corpora. While earlier readers of apocalypticism like Martin Buber denied the force of a concrete theopolitical hour in apocalypticism in contrast to biblical prophetic literature, the force of this ‘hour’ is demonstrated here. In fact, readers of Daniel and members of the
Yahad experienced a ‘thick’ present, with the dimension of time playing a crucial role in the fabric of reality. This was especially the case in sectarian hermeneutics, as discussed here, with surprising analogies to problems raised in 20th century continental philosophy.

The Old Testament is a fierce battleground for atheists and Christian apologists, with each side accusing the other of taking challenging and troubling passages out of context. In this handbook, Joshua Bowen not only provides the background to the Old Testament and the ancient Near East, but engages with hotly contested topics like slavery, failed prophecy, and the authorship of debated Old Testament books.


This book provides:

-clear and straightforward explanations to complex topics

-direct engagement with hot-button Old Testament issues

-specific arguments to help you in a debate or discussion.


Whether you are looking to debate problematic Old Testament issues on social media or have a relaxed, meaningful discussion with a family member over coffee, The Atheist Handbook to the Old Testament is an indispensable resource for you.

The image that appears to Nebuchadnezzar in a dream, in which a colossal statue made from different metals is struck to the ground by a stone (Dan 2), creates an affinity between this story and that of David and Goliath (1 Sam 17). These two stories convey an identical message through the same symbols. While the stone signifies the divine, the man-made metal symbolizes human might. Though this is a broad analogy, which includes both thematic and linguistic parallels, it has not yet received sufficient scholarly attention. This paper unravels the analogy, shedding new light on Daniel 2, its meaning and its purpose.

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

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

The fourth chapter of the book of Daniel recounts a story of a Babylonian king who has a frightening dream, which only a Jewish exile is able to interpret for him. In his dream, and in the subsequent narrative, he is transformed into an animal-like being who lives away from human society for a period of seven years. Ultimately both his wits and his throne are restored to him and he praises the God of the Jews. The bizarre events of this passage make it one of the most puzzling in the entire Hebrew Bible. For generations, scholars have struggled to link Daniel 4 with historical evidence from the reign of the Neo-Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar II (604-562 BCE), with whom it is explicitly associated. However, with the discovery and publication of numerous cuneiform sources from the ancient Near East, many scholars have reconsidered this passage in Daniel, looking instead to the events of the reign of the last Neo-Babylonian king, Nabonidus (556-539 BCE). 1 In this paper I show how the editors of Daniel reworked this Nabonidus tradition, attributing it to Nebuchadnezzar in order to promote their theological ideals. I begin by looking at the background of Daniel 4, examining descriptions of both Nebuchadnezzar's and Nabonidus's reigns. Next I survey the connections between the events of Daniel 4 and other sources, including a stela discovered at Harran 1 See, for example, the works of J.J. Collins, Daniel. A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, Minneapolis 1993; several articles in Judah and the Judeans in the Neo-

This is a talk which shows the East India House Inscription can be used to verify Daniel 1:1-2, and also help date when the Book of Daniel was written.  Daniel says Nebuchadnezzar put the articles of the temple in Jerusalem into the temple of his god, and into the treasure house of his god. This is very specific, and suggests there was a temple complex with multiple buildings with different functions.

The East India House Inscription was buried until 1803, and is Nebuchadnezzar's record of how he renovated the temple his father built, made a treasure house to his god beside the temple,  put a wall around them to make a temple complex, and put treasures in the treasure house from all the lands around him that he had collected as spoils.  Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel agree.

By examining the BCHP 04 and BCHP 06 documents that are during the end of Alexander the Great's time, and during the early Seleucid era, and quoting Herodotus,  we show the temple complex was in ruins as early as 484 BC.  Comparing both Herodotus' record and modern descriptions of the Esagil temple complex, we see they omitted the existence of this treasure house of Nebuchadnezzar's god in the temple complex.  The temple was in ruins by 164-167 BC, and no one could go to see the treasure house.

Therefore, by showing that Daniel's record agrees with the East India House inscription in where Nebuchadnezzar put the treasures he collected as spoils from other lands, and the later historians and documents about the temple do not mention this treasure house, it can be shown that the book of Daniel had to have been written when it says it was written:  during the time period of Nebuchadnezzar through Cyrus, and not during the time of Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 164-167 BC, as some assert.  There was not enough information available to writers and scholars at that time in 164-167 BC to have known where Nebuchadnezzar put the treasures he took from the temple in Jerusalem.

The volume contains seven original studies, each of which focuses on a different chapter or central passage in Daniel and offers a new interpretation or reading of the passage in question. The studies span the Danielic tales and apocalypses, offering innovative analyses that often challenge the scholarly consensus regarding the exegesis of this book. The eight chapters relate to Daniel 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, Susanna, and the conception of angelology in Daniel.
The studies are all based on careful textual analysis, including comparison between the Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek versions (especially regarding Daniel 4–6), and, in each case, the larger arguments are built upon solid philological foundations. Many of the insights proposed in this volume are based upon the realization that the authors of Daniel were frequently interpreters of earlier biblical books, and that the identification of these intertextual clues can be the key to unlocking the meaning of these texts. In this sense, Daniel is similar to other contemporaneous works, such as Jubilees and Qumran literature, but the extent of this phenomenon has not been fully appreciated by scholars of the book. This volume therefore contributes to the appreciation of Daniel as both the latest book in the Hebrew Bible, and a significant work in the landscape of Second Temple Judaism.

Summary:  In the present note, I outline some reasons why I find attempts to view/interpret the book of Daniel as a 2nd cent. composition unsatisfactory.  Key words:  Daniel, Maccabean, date, composition, critical, evangelical.  Date:  Dec. 2019.

A compilation of timelines pertaining to Papal Rome and corresponding to Dan 7:25; 12:5–7, 11–12 (cf. Rev 11:2; 13:5). The chart employs the historicist interpretation method, i.e. the day-year principle.

Note: "2026" cannot be relied upon; the Messiah may come anytime.

There is evidence within the text of the book of Daniel (at Dan 10.12-13) that the key to the seventy weeks prophesy of Dan 9.24-27 is 1 week = 6 years. Using only data Daniel could have known in 536BCE, and this key, Daniel's hidden dates are revealed to be 497, 170, 167 and 164BCE,. These dates are the birth date of Nehemiah; the murder of Onias iii the high priest; the invasion of Judea and occupation of Jerusalem and the Sabbath day massacre; and the liberation of Jerusalem and rededication of the temple. Further detail of the dates of these events are revealed by the 2300 days Dan (8.14, 8.26) and the 1290 days (Daniel 12.11) and the 1335 days Dan(12.12). Daniel 10.4 reveals a day and month date: 24 1 st month , this combined with the year date 167BCE reveals a day exactly 1335 days prior to the rededication of the temple on 25 9 th month 164 BCE as reckoned by the Jubilee solar calendar. This was probably the date of the Sabbath day massacre. From this revealed date, we can calculate three other very precise dates of key events in the Antiochene crisis using the numerical data in Daniel's visions: Sat 30 5 th month 170BCE, Sun 10 8 th month 164BCE and Wed 25 9 th month 164BCE.The precision of the dates reveals the author's commitment to a deterministic, providential view of history. The use of the Jubilee calendar confirms a late 2 nd century BCE origin of the Book as we have it.

This is an open access title distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, which permits any non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided no alterations are made and the original author(s) and source are credited. Further information and the complete license text can be found at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ The terms of the CC license apply only to the original material. The use of material from other sources (indicated by a reference) such as diagrams, illustrations, photos and text samples may require further permission from the respective copyright holder.

The present paper is an excerpt from my commentary on Daniel.  My view of 9.24-27 is broadly Dispensational.  Compared to other Dispensational treatments of the text, it has four key distinctives:  (1.)  It identifies the slightly enigmatic term rĕḥôb-wĕ-ḥārûṣ (trad. ‘square and moat’) with the system of governance established by Ezra and Nehemiah in Jeremiah (‘a public square of decision’).  (2.)  It identifies the first “anointed one” with Nehemiah, and identifies his final visit to Jerusalem with the end of Gabriel’s first seven weeks in 409n/408n.  (3.)  It identifies the second “anointed one” with the “prince to come” (Jesus), whose arrival in Jerusalem is dated to 26n/27n AD.  (4.)  It identifies the “people” of the prince to come with the generation of Jews who rejected their Messiah (e.g., Matt. 11.16, 12.39-45, 23.36), and takes the vb. šḥt (trad. ‘destroy’: 9.26a) to refer to the behaviour of the Jews over the years 28-70 AD, and, in particular, to the revolt in 70 AD.

Artigo do Dr. Jacques Doukhan. Nesta exegese, discutem-se problemas relacionados às 70 semanas de Daniel 9:24-27 à luz de seu contexto maior em Daniel 9, bem como em todo o livro. O autor aborda a estrutura literária do v. 24 e dos vs. 25-27, expõe possíveis compreensões das expressões em paralelismo nestes versos e conclui com algumas dimensões teológicas da profecia como um todo (levitismo, universalismo e escatologia).

Texto original pode ser encontrado em:

https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/old-testament-pubs/79/

La presente investigación hace un estudio de la frase “los entendidos” en Daniel 12: 3 y 10, armonizando su interpretación, vínculos e implicancias teológicas frente a todo el marco del capítulo 12, la visión que la contiene y en perspectiva del libro en general. Para ello se emplea la metodología de exégesis bíblica, que incluye el análisis y determinación de texto, como de contexto. Esto es seguido por el análisis gramatical. Posteriormente, a través de un análisis interpretativo, se busca tener una compresión armonizada de la expresión “los entendidos” frente a todos los otros elementos, que están sujetos a interpretación, dentro del capítulo 12. Finalmente, en el análisis de teología, se destaca el aspecto contrastante y diferencial de la frase estudiada, como su aporte teológico en cuanto a salvación en el tiempo del fin.

--------------------

The present investigation makes a study of the phrase “those of understanding” (“wise”, in other versions) in Daniel 12: 3 and 10, harmonizing its interpretation, links and theological implications against the entire framework of chapter 12, the vision that contains it and the perspective of the book in general. For this, the methodology of biblical exegesis is used, which includes the analysis and determination of text, as well as context. This is followed by grammar analysis. Subsequently, through an interpretive analysis, it is sought to have a harmonized comprehending of the expression “those of understanding” (wise) in front of all the other elements, which are subject to interpretation, within chapter 12. Finally, in the analysis of theology, it stands out the contrasting and differential aspect of the phrase studied, as its theological contribution regarding salvation in the time of the end.

By John J. Collins, Forms of the Old Testament Literature, vol. XX, 1984 -- This book is the fourth in a series of twenty-four volumes planned for publication throughout the nineteen-eighties. The series eventually will present a form-critical analysis of every book and each unit of the Old Testament (Hebrew Bible) according to a standard outline and methodology. The aims of the work are fundamentally exegetical, attempting to understand the biblical literature from the viewpoint of a particular set of questions. Each volume in the series will also give
an account of the history of the form-critical discussion of the material in question, attempt to bring consistency to the terminology for the genres and formulas of the biblical literature, and expose the exegetical procedure in such a way as to enable students and pastors to engage in their own analysis and interpretation. It is hoped, therefore, that the audience will be a broad one, including not only biblical scholars but also students, pastors, priests, and rabbis who are engaged in biblical interpretation.
(This book was made available at the following website: https://www.pdfdrive.com/daniel-with-an-introduction-to-apocalyptic-literature-forms-of-the-old-testament-literature-d185470265.html)

Daniel chapter 11 gives characteristics of the world leaders mostly during the Greek empire, and transitions to the Roman empire, as two rival powers:  the king of the north, and the king of the south.  The last king of the north is described in detail in verses 21-45.  Biblical historians have had difficulty in identifying this last king of the north in either Greek or Roman history, and many Bible scholars have agreed this is describing a ruler in the future.  In this talk, we look at each of the verses about the last king of the north, and compare it with three modern leaders:  Pope Francis, Donald Trump, and Vladimir Putin.  By showing the actions of these leaders and their predecessors, the assignment can be made to one of these leaders, as ruler over a specific territory.  Since the verses span the rule of more than one of these leaders, the prophecy can be understood to show that it is the leader of a specific territory who is the last power before the great time of trouble starts, and Jesus' return happens, as described in Daniel chapter 12.  A review of Psalm 91 is also given as comfort at the end of the presentation.