Do you know for a fact that if you were
to
die today that you would not go to hell?
If you do not know, click
here.
No other book in the Bible
has been attacked like the Book of Daniel. For 1600
years, beginning with Porphyry, a Syrian, in the
Third Century, the book has been in the “Critic’s
Den” and fiercely assailed by sceptical writers.
Porphyry claimed that instead of being written by
Daniel about B. C. 533, it was a forgery written in
the time of the Maccabees about B. C. 168, and after
Antiochus Epiphanes, so clearly foretold in the
book, had appeared, and was written to comfort and
encourage the Jews in those trying times. Some
modern critics claim that Daniel, if such a person
ever lived, had nothing to do with the book at all,
that a holy, pious, and gifted Jew, who lived after
the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, (B. C. 165), wrote
it, and that it is pure fiction. But how could a man
who would write such a book and try to palm it off
as real history be a holy and pious Jew? This shows
to what an extremity those who do not want to accept
the book, because it foretells the future, are
driven.
There is no question but that the Book of Daniel
existed long before the days of Antiochus Epiphanes,
B. C. 175-165. How did it get into the Septuagint,
the Greek translation of the Scriptures, that was
completed in B. C. 285, or over 100 years before it
is claimed that a pious Jew wrote it? Josephus, the
Jewish Historian, gives us a history of the Jewish
people from Abraham down to the destruction of
Jerusalem. A. D. 70. Narrating incidents of the
struggle with Antiochus Epiphanes, he says that
these things came to pass “according to the prophecy
of Daniel which was given 408 years before.” Which
means, according to Josephus, that the Book of
Daniel was written about B. C. 573. Josephus also
tells us that when Alexander the Great, who is
foretold in Daniel’s prophecies (Dan. 8:5-8) came in
the course of his conquests to Jerusalem, B. C. 332,
that Jaddua, the High Priest, showed him the
reference to himself in the Book of Daniel, which so
pleased him that he spared the city. According to
this the Book of Daniel must have been written prior
to B. C. 332. Again, Ezekiel was a contemporary of
Daniel, and wrote in Babylon the book which bears
his name. He was held in high esteem by his fellow
exiles and was much consulted by them. If Daniel was
in Babylon in high official position Ezekiel must
have known it. But he need not necessarily have
mentioned Daniel in his book. But he does. Three
times his name is mentioned –
|
“Though these three men, Noah, DANIEL, and Job, were in it,
they should deliver but their own souls by
their righteousness, saith the Lord God.”
Ezek. 14:14, 20; Ezek. 28:3. |
Thus Ezekiel bears witness to the fact that such a
man as Daniel existed, and that he was so noted for
his righteousness as to be classed with Noah, and
for his wisdom as to be classed with Job.
But the highest authority for the authenticity of
the Book of Daniel is our Lord, who said in His
Olivet Discourse –
|
“When ye therefore shall see the ‘Abomination of
Desolation,’ spoken of by DANIEL THE
PROPHET, stand in the Holy Place, whoso
readeth, let him understand.” Matt. 24:15. |
Whosoever therefore denies the Authenticity of the
Book of Daniel impeaches the integrity and wisdom of
the Lord Jesus Christ, for He, in the above
quotation, affirms that there was such a Prophet as
Daniel, and that He foretold that there was such a
thing as the “Abomination of Desolation” to stand in
the Holy Place of the Temple.
It is claimed that no such person of influence and
authority as Daniel ever lived at Babylon, because
the name Daniel does not appear upon the monuments
or among the historical records of Babylonia. The
claim is premature because comparatively few such
records have been unearthed or deciphered, and the
absence of Daniel’s name is no proof, for his Jewish
name Daniel was changed to the heathen name
Belteshazzar. Neither is it any proof because the
name Belteshazzar does not appear, for the name
might have been abbreviated and spelled differently,
as was often the custom with lengthy names. The fact
then of silence is no argument. For illustration, we
read in Luke 2:41-50 that when Jesus was 12 years of
age He went up to Jerusalem at the “Feast of the
Passover.” Did He not go up to any other Feast
between that time and when He entered on His Public
Ministry? We do not know. The Scriptures are silent.
We know from John’s Gospel that He went up to the
Feasts regularly after His Baptism, is it not
reasonable to suppose that He did before? The “Law”
required every male to regularly attend the Feasts,
and as Jesus scrupulously kept the Law, the
inference is that He from His twelfth year went
regularly to the Feasts, at least to the Passover
Feast, which was a type of Himself. The silence then
as to Daniel’s name among the Babylonian records is
no proof that he never existed.
It is a fact that we must not forget, that heathen
monarchs, like Nebuchadnezzar, recorded on the
monuments only the things that glorified themselves,
and the great men of their Empires are not
mentioned. What about the governors, judges,
generals, priests, wise men, and the sculptors,
architects, engineers, etc., who planned, and
supervised the building of the magnificent walls,
towers, bridges, tubes, temples and palaces of
“Great Babylon?” Their names do not appear upon the
records, why then Daniel’s? The Book of Daniel is
discounted because it does not give a list of kings
between Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar. But why
should it? It would seem from the record that Daniel
was deposed from his high office at the death of
Nebuchadnezzar, and does not publicly appear until
he is called on to pronounce the doom of Belshazzar.
Why then should he record events, etc., not
connected with the purpose of his book?
The presence of fifteen Persian and three Greek
words in the Book of Daniel has led some to claim
that the book could not have been written as early
as B. C. 533. But the presence of these words is an
argument for the early date. If the book had been
written in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, the
author would not only have inserted a few Greek
words, but he would have incorporated in it many
Greek expressions and ideas. The Greek words are the
names of musical instruments, probably imported by
Nebuchadnezzar from Greece, or played by Greek
musicians captured in war. The use of foreign words
is confirmatory of Daniel’s presence at the court of
a country that was constantly being visited by
emissaries from other lands.
|
Proofs of the Authenticity of the Book |
Mention is made in chapter 1:3 of Ashpenaz, Master
of the Eunuchs. The word in the original is
Rabsaris. But until about twenty-five years ago the
word was not found upon the monuments of Babylon,
and its absence was used by the critics as proof
that there was no such official at the court of
Nebuchadnezzar, and therefore the Book of Daniel was
not authentic. But the name has been discovered upon
a conical brick preserved in the British Museum,
thus proving that Daniel is right.*[* “Inspiration
and Accuracy of the Holy Scriptures.” John Urquhart.
P. 358-359]
We are told in chapter 1:2 that Nebuchadnezzar
carried the vessels of the House of God (the Temple
at Jerusalem) “into the land of Shinar, to the house
of his god.” From an inscription left by
Nebuchadnezzar we find that it was his custom to
thus place the choicest of his spoils in the house
of his god. Could a writer, writing 400 years later,
who knew nothing whatever of Nebuchadnezzar’s
custom, ascribe such conduct to him?
Again, the fact that at the Babylonian court there
were a class of men called “seers,” who were
classified as magicians, astrologers, and
sorcerers, and over which Daniel was made head, is
another proof of the historical character of the
book, for a later fictional writer, picturing a
vanished state of society after his imagination,
would not be likely to give the proper
classification.
While the Book of Daniel treats of the “Times of the
Gentiles,” it does not give an outline of all the
Gentile nations, but only of those which were
successively to have sway over the territory of the
“Prophetic Earth,” or that part of the earth covered
by the Old Roman Empire. Bible prophecy has nothing
to say about the nations as such in their relation
to one another, but only in their relation to Israel
and the Holy Land.
|
“When the Most High divided to the nations their
inheritance, when He separated the sons of
Adam (at Babel), He set the bounds of the
people ACCORDING TO THE NUMBER OF THE
CHILDREN OF ISRAEL.” Deut. 32:8.
|
The key to all prophecy is the Jew. If the Jewish
nation had not forsaken God and neglected His
sabbaths, there would have been no “Times of the
Gentiles.” The “Times of the Gentiles” began when
God transferred earthly rule from the Kings of
Israel to the Gentile king Nebuchadnezzar, and they
will continue until Israel again becomes the “Head
of the Nations.” Daniel is distinctly the Prophet of
the “Times of the Gentiles.” His vision sweeps the
whole course of Gentile World Rule until the setting
up of the Messianic or Millennial Kingdom of Christ.
Daniel was not a Prophet in the same sense that
Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Minor Prophets
were prophets. Their mission was to go to the people
and proclaim the Word of the Lord, while Daniel’s
mission was to record what was revealed to him
through . visions. While he did not have the
“Prophetic Office,” he had the “Prophetic Gift.” The
Book of Daniel is the Apocalypse of the Old
Testament, as the Book of Revelation is the
Apocalypse of the New Testament, and one cannot be
understood without the other, and it is worthy of
note that as Daniel is thrice called the man
“greatly beloved,” the Apostle John is called the
“beloved disciple.” To these two men was accorded
the privilege of seeing in vision the whole “course
of time” from B. C. 606, on down to the Second
Coming of Christ.
|
THE DIVISIONS Of THE BOOK |
The Book naturally divides itself into two grand
divisions of six chapters each. The first division
is mainly “Historical,” and the second is
“Prophetica1.” See Chart of the Book of Danie1. The
Book is written in two languages. The first chapter,
and the first three verses of the second are written
in Hebrew, and so are chapters 8 to 12, but from the
fourth verse of the second chapter to the end of the
seventh the language is Aramaic, the ancient
language of Syria, and substantially identical with
Chaldaic, the language of ancient Babylonia, and the
language at that time of trade and international
intercourse. The use of the two languages is
apparent. What concerns the Gentile Empires is
written in their language, Aramaic, and what
concerns the Jews is written in Hebrew. This is
evidence that the Book was written at Babylon, and
written by a Jew. As further evidence the Hebrew is
the same in style as the Hebrew of Ezekiel, who was
a captive at Babylon at the same time as Danie1.
Of Daniel himself we know more than of any of the
other prophets. He was of the Tribe of Judah, and of
noble, if not royal, blood. He was carried captive
from Jerusalem in the third year of Jehoiakim, B. C.
606, in the first invasion of Judah by
Nebuchadnezzar. He was probably twenty years of age
when he was taken to Babylon, and in a short time he
rose to a very high position in the Empire, which he
held during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar. At his
death Daniel went into retirement and is not heard
of again until he was summoned to pronounce the doom
of Belshazzar. He lived through the whole period of
the “Seventy Years Captivity,” and became the “Chief
President” over the 120 Princes of the Kingdom,
under Darius the Median, when he was at least ninety
years old. He is the only spotless character in the
Bible outside of the Lord Jesus Christ. There is not
one flaw to be found in his character. He was a man
“greatly beloved” of God. He associated with kings
and politicians. He led a public life. He held
office, yet his character was never impeached. He
talked with angels. The Lord Himself appeared unto
him, and he had visions of God. He was a great man
of faith, and though his name is not mentioned in
the great “Faith Chapter” of the New Testament, he
is referred to in it as one who “stopped the mouths
of lions.”Heb. 11:33. He was the –
of his day. It was given to him to study the “SIGNS
OF THE TIMES,” to know the outcome of all the
world’s boasted civilization, and to see that the
nations of the earth should degenerate in political
power until the clay of democracy, socialism, and
anarchy should so weaken the nations that there
would be no cohesion among them, and that the only
salvation for a chaotic world would be the return of
Christ, and the setting up of His Millennial
Kingdom. |
|
