ly by Jerome, Orosius, and Theodoret; also by
all the expositors of the Middle-age church after
Walafrid Strabo, and by a majority of modems,
of whom we mention Buddeus (Hist, eccles. p.
ii. sect. 5, p. (519 ss.), Joach. Lange, Starke,
Zeis, Velthusen (Ammadpersiones ad Dan. 11.
27-45 ; Prag, 1783), Menken (Das Monarchien-
hUd, Brem, and Aurich, 1809), Hengstenberg,
Hiivemick, Caspari (Die vier daitiel. Weltmonar-
chieii, iu the Zeitschrift fiir lut/i. Theologie und
Kirche, 1841, No. 4), Hofmann ( Weissaguiig
und Erf iiUung, 1.276 et seq.), Keil (Einl. ins
A. T. § 134, p. 443, [also in his Cuninientary on
Daniel]), Gausaen {Daniel le Pri/p/iete, 2d. edit.
18 JQ, I. 250 ss.), Auberlen {Daniel, etc., p. 42 et
seq.), Ziindel (Kiit Unterss. etc., p. 74 et seq.),
Kliefoth, Fliller, Gartner (in their expo.sitions),
Pusey (p. 58 ss.), Volok (Vindicia Dan., p. 7
ss. ), [and the monographs added in the Intro-
duction]. — For the history of this orthodox-
churchly interpretation of the image of the mon-
archies in older times, see Antirjucn et pervul-
gat(^ de guatu&r Monai-chiis senteiitiw plenior et
uberior ansertk, auct. J. G. Jano, 1728 (also iu
Breyer's Histor. Magazin, vol. I., p. 114 et seq.);
and in relation to its influence on the conception
and representation of universal history during
the 16th and 17th centuries, see Meusel, Bihlio-
t/ieca kistorica, vol. I., pt. 1, p. 176 ss. *
* [Justice to this popular view of the fourth kingdom of
Daniel's prophecies, which applies it to the Roman empire,
I either as a pagan or a papal tyranny, seems to require a
statement here of the principal arguments in its favor.
Other considerations will be examined, as well as some of
these more in detail, in the exposition of the passages under
which they arise.
1. The prominence of the Roman dominion, as being the
only really world-wide government after that of Ale.xander,
certainly lends great probability to its selection as the cul-
mination of the previous world-monarchies in comparison
with the territorially insignificant realm of the Seleucida;,
But this argument seems to us to be neutralized by indica-
tions in the text itself, especially the fact that Daniel's pro-
phecies in this matter are bounded by the Orient as to their
arena of dominion, the chosen people of God and their local
heritage being the .stand-point from which their influence is
measured. The Jews diil not come into any se\ere contact
with Rome till after the dawn of the Messianic era, and (iis
the author observes above) Rome itself did not then succumb
under the collision. 1'he note of time ** in the days of these
kings'' (ver. 441 cannot be pres.sed into a corroboration of
this synchronism, for then it would co\ er the whole range
of the j>revious dynasties likewise (see the exposition of thiil
verse). But a most decisive prohibition of the allusitn tc
Rome appears in the continual degeneration of the succes
sive empiies from the head downwards, till the fourth i;
deteriorated into a base metal and even a maudlin alloy, it
is true the epithet " strong as iron " well applies to ftume,
but it attjxined its culmination both of force and culture
under the early emperors, and there was no subseq'iem
change of government in its decay corresponding to the dis-
tinction between the unadulterated metal of the legs and thf
CHAP. II. 1-49.
bi
5. The rehition of the image of the monar-
diies^ when correctly interpreted, to the ?iisto7'y
crumbling mixture of the feet and toes. In the case of the
SyroGreek monarchy, on the other hand, all these particu-
lars have their exact counterpart.
2. The difficulties attendant upon the effort to identify
with the history of the Seleucid succe5;sion the particulars
elsewhere given in connection with the fourth empire, es-
pecially the list of ten kings and the fall of three of them be-
fore the successful one (chap. vii. 24) have been urged in fa-
vor of the "ortho<iox " view. But the Roman interpretation,
on the other hantl. seems to be beset with equal if not great-
er difficulties in this point, as will be seen in the exposition
of that passage. Chap. xi. of this book is acknowledged on
all hands to be a detailed account of the dyn:isty of the Se-
leucidae, showing that the prophetic ken had it prominently
in view; and the little horn of the he-goat (chap. viii. 9) is
generally admitted to be AntiochuR Epiphanes. It is there-
fore hard to resist the conclusion that the little horn of the
fourth beast (chap. vii. S) is the same king, and the fourth
section of the colossal image (chap. ii. 40 et eeq.) the same
dynasty. The characteristics make the parallel complete.
3. The violent persecution experienced by the saints
mder Roman power, particularly in the days of papal su-
premacy, has l>een especially thought to justify this scheme
oi interpretation. But it must lie remembered that the
Seleucidse were the tirst kings who really oppressed the peo-
ple of God on account of their religion, and the efforts of
Antiochns to exterminate their faith were of the most extra-
ordinary character, not exceeded by the vinilence of the
Inqu.siti'ju itself. Moreover, the attempt to apply the pro-
phecies in queistion to both pagan and papal Rome, wenkens
the force of the whole intei-pretatinu. The effort t^) find in
the pope, as such, an emphatic and direct fulfillment of the
'â– little horn" is indeed sustained by the striking analogy of
blnap/iemous atrocity, but fails to find an equal agreement
with many other features of the picture, e.ff., the â– ' mingling
•,hemsidves with the seed of men " (chap. ii. 43 ; absolutely
*orbidden by the celibacy of the pontiffs and clergy), the
yrigin in dynastic and territorial revolution ("the sea,"
chap. vii. 3, and "earth," chap. v.i. 11), the pointed refer-
ence to the Mosaic cultus and temple (chap. viii. 11), and
the whole tenor uf the overthrow by civil and military con-
vulsion (chap. xi. 40 et seq.). We may als<j adduce the
gross incongruity of representing any branch of the Chris-
tian Church, however corrupt, under these heathen symbols,
and a-* the final foe of God's people.
4. The marked simiUiriry between the visions of Daniel
snd those of John in the Revelation, extending to details of
phraseology as well as of emblem, has naturally led to the
beUef that they coincide in application. This however, in
a superficial view of th'-ir import. In the New Testament
we everywhere find the symbols and even the terms of the
O. T. used conventionally with a different application and
in a wider sense. Thus, in our Lord's eschatologiciil dis-
course (Matt, xxiv.), the symptoms of the dissolution of Ju-
flaism are made prcinonition=i of the end of all thinirs; the
whole of Ezekiel's wail over the queen of ancient commerce
(chap, xxvii.) is transfi-iTed alni'^st literaUy to the apocalyp-
tic overthrow of the later mi^tre-sof the world (Rev. xviii.) ;
the verj' names, Babylon. Gog. etc.. iire applied tf> new-
places and persons, just as Sodom. Esypt, Zion, etc., had
long been current with a metaphorical meaning. It is a
gi'i-at mistake, however, t** infer that these N.-T. adapta-
tions ot tyjie-s and imager}' and language, familiarly drawn
from the O. T., necessjirily denote the same objects or
rvent*. They are rather related as common types uf some
recuiring Antichrist, as extensions of one general world-
pover ever inimiciil to the cause of spiritual religion. To
identify them is to destroy the significance and beauty of
the conventional signs by which they are expressed. The
shallowness of this method of exposition, as applied to St.
John's Ap:>calypse, has been demonstrated by the futile
attempts to make them quadrate with the facts of his-
tory.
5. Lastlj-. the periods assigned in Daniel for the fulfill-
ment of the various prophecies, are appealed to in support
of their application to Rome. This seems to us, on the
c intrary. a fatal argument against the view in question.
It is true the same numbers are often used by the Reve-
lator for the length of "the t.mes and &easona" prefigured
in his visions, but we have never yet seen any satisfactory
adjustment of them to the history nf the Roman empire or
th? papal church. We are stronu'ly inclined to that view
which regards them as being conventionally adopted by St.
John as representations of longer or shorter periods of
indefinite length. But in Daniel they unquestionably de-
n Jto tletcrmiuate spaces of time, and "for that very reason
— as they are all periods of comparaiively l)rief extent ( some
three and a half years, with the exception of the notable
terra of 7U weeks, or rather hebdomads ; see the exposition
of that passage)— they must be limited by the history of
of tJie founding of Chi^^tiaaity^ must be found,
in view of the foregoing- considerations, in the
assumption that the destroying stono represent?
the kingdom of Christ at the time of its intro-
duction on the historical arena, while the
growth of the stone until it fills the earth, in-
dicates its gradual extension over all the coun-
tries of the earth. The fulfillment of this
closing incident of the prophetic vision as a
whole, is therefore not confined exclusively to
the initial period of the history of Christianity
— as if the stone represented the pre-Messianic
Israel, or any other historical agency prepara-
tory to the advent of Christ ; nor is it to be re-
ferred entirely to the future of Christianity — as
if the destruction of the colossus of world-powers
had not yet transpired, and the overthrow of the
fourth monarchy were reserved for the final
judgment or some other eschatological event.
The descent of the stone and the overthrow of
the image were rather realized in the historj' of
salvation, when Christ, the stone that was re-
jected by the builders, ground His enemies to
powder, and became the elect and precious
comer-stone iu Zion, upon which all the foes of
God's kingdom are henceforth to fall, and by
which they are to be shattered and put to
ahame (Matt. xxi. 43-44 ; 1 Pet. ii. ()-8 ;
cf. Isa. viii. 14 ; xxviii. 16). This closing-
scene of the vision is in the course of being
steadily and increasingly fulfilled, inasmuch
as, on the one baud, the destruction and dis-
solution of the world-powers, and on the other,
the growth of the stone into a mighty mountain
that fills the whole earth, are yet far from their
Divinely appointed goal — however surely the
world, together with Satan, its head, may have
been long since judged in principle bj" the Spirit
of Christ, and however clearly the only true God,
who is declared in Christ, may have demon-
strated, in a certain measure, his nature as the
all-supporting rock, from all eternity in the con-
gregation of His faithful ones (as the " Rock of
Israel." Gen. xlix. 34; Deut. xxxii. 4 et seq.,
the Antiochian jier^ecution and the Maccabfean revolution.
The only escape fritra th.s conclusion is by a report to «hat
is termed the " year-f or-a-day hypothesis," which consists in
understanding the dayR in each of the periods in question
as put for so many years. It is sufficient to suy of this .some-
what popular and certainly convenient theory, that it is a
conjecture devoid of countenance in Scripture. True, the
prophets occasionally make a 1 tciTil daj- the type of a literal
year, but they never do so without immediately adding the
explanation, for the express purpose of preventing such n
generalization of the rule. Besides the passages in Gen. i.
5 et seq. ; ii. 4 : 2 Peter iJi. S (which would prove too
much), the only instances of this usage adduced are Num.
xiv.:^; Ezek. iv, 1-b; Dan. ix. :i4 (but this is not in point);
Rev. ii. 10 (but here the appl.cation is a pure assumption) ;
Rev. xi. 'J-11 (an equally imaginary case) ; Rev. xi. 2, 3, au<l
xii. 6, 14 (to include which is a simple petitin princi)}ii);
Ri'v. XX. 6 (a rather difficult case — think ot a millennium of
ytio.OOO years!). See the exhaustive list by Dr. Pond, in
the ^fetll. Quar. Hev. for Jan., 1874, p. llli sq. ; where the
learned writer argues that if one part of a vision be a sjTn-
bol so must the rest, e.g., if the locusus in Rev. ix., be sym-
bolical (which is probably true only so far as they are a
type of ruin in general, not any particular form or agency),
so must the nccompanying number be ; ergn, the "5 months"
of ver. 5 must denote 150 jcars — just as if the number
might not be symbolical of an indefinite period, as it no
doubt is. We conclude, therefore, by reiterating that no
clear instance can be .idduced of the use of a "day" in Scrip'
tural prophecy for an exact year,w/iere the ty!)ii:al charac-
ter of the lime in not immeJiniely exjjrensed as being lim-
ited to thiit particular ca.se. much less is there any iutima-
tiim that such a rule is to apply to prophecy in general. To
admit such a principle in Biblical interp rotation is to ftbfto-
don all precision in the nsc of languagu.]
ts
THE PROPHET DAIilEL.
Isa. XXX. 29 ; xliv. 8 ; 1 Sam. ii. 2, etc. ; cf.
the " rock of strength," Isa. xvii. 10 ; " rock
of eternities." Isa. xxvi. 4; " rock of refuge,"
Psa. xciv. 22, etc.). — Here again we are com-
pelled to reject several partial conceptions :
(it.) The identification of the stone or fifth mon-
archy with the Roman dominion (Grotius), which
clearly leads to an improper naturalizing of the
pass.ige, so far as it confines itself simply to the
earthly relations of the historical Roman empire;
hut which certainly includes an important meas-
ure of truth in so far as it regards the Roman
world-power as a Divinely chosen and sanctioned
bearer and promoter of the royal Messianic cause
at the stage of its introduction (cf. supra, No. 4).
(I).) The one-sided and exclusive reference of
the stone to the people of Israel (older Jewish
expositors ; Porphyry ; — see, on the other hand,
Jerome on the passage) .
(c.) That interpretation of the stone by which
it symbolizes merely the person of the Messio/i,
as distinct from the kingdom founded by Him
(Cosmos Indicopleustes, and several rabbins, as
Saadia, Ibn-Ezra, etc. ; and, after them, especially
J. Clir. Beermann. De monarchia qnnrtn, in his
Meditntt. xiolitic(f. 10T9, where he submits an in-
terpretation of the several kingdoms that is
otherwise entirely correct ; cf. Bertlioldt, as
above, p. 215 et seq., in relation to Beermann,
and partially against him).
(rf. ) The reference of the stone, not to the
first, but to the second advent of Christ, and al-
so to the erection of the Apocalyptic millennium,
which is said to constitute the " fifth monarchy,"
according to the true and actual meaning of the
prophet. This view was held by the Chiliasts
(Enthusiasts, Anabaptists) of the 16th and 17th
centuries, and especially by the fanatical sect
of Quintomonarchists or Fifth-monarchy men in
England at the time of Cromwell (see Weingar-
tcn. Die Rfrolutionskirchen Engliin<U, Berlin,
1868, p. 180 et seq.); also by several recent ex-
positors of a subtile-chiliastictendency, especially
Anberlen (p. 42 et seq. ; 248 et seq. ; — in opposi-
tion to him see Kranichfeld. p. 118 et seq.). Sev-
eral earlier exegetes of pietistic-chiliasticor theo-
sophic temper, e.'j., Joach. Lange, Starke, M. Fr.
Roos, Mencken, etc.. contented themselves with
finding a prophetic reference to the millennium in
the final destiny of the stone, hence in its de-
velopment to a greatness that fills and controls
the earth, whicli is entirely admissible in view
of the above.
(i. The practical and homiUtical treatment of
this chapter will dwell predominantly on either
its historical or its prophetic features. The
leading subjects for consideration will be either
the answer to Daniel's jirayer and his jiromo-
tion above the heathen wise-men. or the tri-
umph of the kingdom of God over the world-
powers.
a. The former theme is immediately connected
with the subject of the preceding chapter, since
Daniel's jiromotion and honor were merely ad-
ditional fruits of the faithful obedience, which
had already in that connection been pr.aised as
the source and basis of his greatness. Especially
suitable texts may be found in the prayer of
Daniel and his friends, vs. 16-23, and in the
closing verses 46-49. Compare Calvin's obser-
vation on V. IC : " ViVteftus, quo coiisilU), et qua
tti>im Jiducin Daniel poHuincenl, 'einpus sibi
dari. Cormlium hoe fiat ut Dei gratiam implo-
raret , . . . Non duUmn eH, quin sperarerit
Daniel, quod adepttcs eM, nempe somnium regis
sibi reDelatum iri. Exponit ergo sociis suit, ut
simid postulent misericordiam a Deo." Also
Chr, B. Michaelis on the same passage : " Dan-
iel eadem fide, qua postmodum ova leonnm ob-
strinxit (Heb. xi. 3), hie solutionem somnii, quod
necdumnonerat, NebucJuidnezaripromittit, certus
jam de exauditione precum, qu/u super hoc re ad
Deuni fusurus erat (Jas. i. 6)."— On v. 19 cf.
Jerome: ^'â– Somnium regis suo discit somnio;
immo et somnium et interpretationem ejus Dei
revelatione cognoseit. quod dcemones ignwabant,
sapientia saieuli scire non poterat. Unde et
Apostoli mysterium, quod cnnctis retro genera-
tionibus fuerat ignotum. Domino revelante cog-
noscunt (Eph. iii. 5)."*— On v. 22 see Starke :
"If many things in the Word of God are too
deep and hidden for thee, the fault is not in the
Word, but in thyself. Beseech God to enlighten
thy dark heart, and thou shalt understand the
depths of God's Word with ever-increasing clear-
ness." — Notice also the evidence of Daniel's pro-
found humility and modesty in v. 23 J: Thou
" hast made known unto me now vJiat v.e desired
of thee ;" on which Jerome (and after him
Theodoret, Calvin, etc.) correctly observes;
" Quod guatuor rogant, uni ostenditur. vt et
arrogantiam fugiat. ne solus impetrasse rideatur,
et agat gratias, quod mysterium smnni solus
audierit.^^ — In treating the closing paragraph,
vs. 46-49, notice particularly that it is a heathen
ruler, a worshipper of idols, who is compelled
to exalt and glorify Daniel and his God. Calvin
(on V. 47) : '• Profani homines interdum rapiiin-
tur in admiration em Dei, et tunc large et prolixe
fatentur, guicguid posset requiri a veris Dei
cultoribus. Sed iUud est momentaneum : deinde
interea manent impliciti suis supeistionibus. Ex-
torquet igitur illis Deus rerba, gmim ita pie
hquiintur, sed inlus retinent sua mti(i,ut facile
postea recidant ad pristinos mores, quemad-
modum memorabile exemphim. postea sequetur.
Quicguid sit. voluit Deus ore prof am regis ghriam
suam promulgari. et ilium esse pi-acone^n sua
potentio' et sui mnninis."
b. With regard to the prophetic contents of
Nebuchadnezzar's dream as brought out in Dan-
iel's interpretation, vs. 37-44, Melancthon justly
comprehends that the political element must in
this connection be decidedly subordinate to the
religious and Messianic factor, and observes:
'â– Ueeo enarratio non tantum est politica de im-
perils, sed prabet etiam ocaisionem Danieli con-
ciiinandi de toto regno Christi, de novissimo
jiidicio, de causa peccati, de redemptione et in-
stauratione liumani generis ; cur sit tanta mundi
breritas ; quale sit futurum perpetuum regnum,
utrum ill hac iwtura immunda vel alia ; qtialis sit
futurus Redemtor, et qumnodo ad hoc regnum
perceniatur. Jia hwc brecis narratio eomplectitur
sutnmam Ecangelii.''' — Cf. Calvin (on' v. 44) :
* TertulIian'R assertion {dejfovn., c. 7). with reference to
vs. 1-19. that Daniel and his friends fasted during three
days, and that for this reason their prayer was heard, has
its foundation in the fact that he (or ratlier the pre-Jero-
Diian Latin version of the Bible used by him) f.ill,,wed an
ancient ascetic interpolation of the passage, «hich is still
found in the Septnagint : <eat iropijyyetAe vntm^av Kd\ ht-r^trtv.
Kai Ti/xuptaf frjnjo-ai.— Cf. the similar ascetic exten.slon
which the passage 1 Cor. vii. 5 experit-nced at an eirly day,
by the interpolation of the words r^ in^irttla before rji
TliKKltVxi-
CHAP. m. 1-30.
89
" Summa igitur est: quamris visuri sint Judcei
potentU&ima imperia, qua malum et terrorem
ipsis incutiant., immo reddaiit fere attonitos,
Uimen nikU in iUis fore stabile rel Jinnum, quod
scilicet cfnitraria sint regno fUii Dei. Atqui male-
dictionem denuntiut Jesaias (c. Ix. 12) omnibus
regnis, qua non sortierint ecdesiee Dei. Quum
ergo omnes iUi monarchce diabolica audacia erexe-
rint cristas adeersus JUium Dei, oportuit deleri,
et in iUis consjticuam fieri Dei maledictionem, qum
Tutbetur apud prophetam. Sic ergo contririt
Christtu omnia mundi imperia. Hortatur
propheta (Psa. ii. 13) omnes reges terra, ut
mcuUntur FUium. Quum neque Bahylonii,
neqiie Persm, neque Macedones, neque Romani
Christo sese subjecerint, immo omnes suas vires
eontulerint ad ipsnm oppugnandum et fuennt
Jwstes pietatis, opportuit deleri a Christo regno,
.... Neque etiam liic Daniel ea tanturn
attinyit, gum patent oculis hominum, sed altius
attoUit mentes nostras, nempe ut sciamus, non
alibi veram fulturam, in qua quiescamus, posse
reperiri. quam in imo Christi (1 Cor. iii. 3).
Extra Christum ergo prouuntiat quieqiiid splen-
d^ris et potentiee est in mundo et opulentia et ro-
boris, hoc esse aiducum et inralidum et nuUius
momenti." — Starke (after Geier, on t. 44) : "All
the kingdoms of earth are subject to change,
but Christ's kingdom shall endure for ever, and
no violence can accomplish its overthrow "
(Matt. xiv. 19).— Id. (on v. 37 et seq.) : " If
God foreknows so exactly all changes in the
world-kingdoms, and if He governs them all by
His wisdom, should He not know the changes
which are to transpire in His church ? Should
He not control them for good ? " (Matt. x. 29,
30). — Menken {Das ilona rchienbUd, p. 83):
" The object for which God created the world,
and the end for which He governs it, is the king-
dom of God. The kingdom of God is the in-
visible root which holds and sustains the world-
kingdoras. the invisible power which smites and
destroys them. Their more or less intimate
connection with the kingdom of God decides the
duration, the importance, the significance of
world-kingdoms. The fate and the history of
all the kingdoms of earth, that have no impor-
tant connection with the kingdom of God, or no
connection at all, would be of no value. What-
ever may be their history, it is always unimpor-
tant, because they exert no influence whatever,
or at best a very limited influence, upon the
postponing or hastening of the final development
of things, upon the supplanting of the world-
kingdoms by the kingdom of God."
9
10
11
3. The test of the faith of DanieCs Hiree friends in the fiery furnace.
Chap. III. 1-30.
1 Nebuchaihiezzar tlie king made an image of gold, whose [its] height was
threescore cubits, ««(/ the breadth thereof [its breadth] six cubits: lie set it up in
2 the plain of Dura, in the province of Babylon. Then [And] Nebuchadnezzar
the king sent to gather together the princes [satraps], the governors, and the
captains [pashas], the judges, the treasurers, the counsellors, the sheriffs
[lawyeis], and all the rulers of the provinces,' to come to </te dedication of the
3 image which Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up. Then the princes, the gov-
ernors, and captains, the judges, the treasurers, the counsellors, the sherifls, and
all the rulers of the pirovinces, v:e.re gathered together unto the dedication of the
image that Nebuchadnezzar the king/(fK/ set up ; and they stood \were standing]
4 before the image that Nebuchadnezzar ha<l set up. Then [And a herald cried
aloud [with might], To you it is commanded [lit. they are saying], O Uit. The]
•'> people, nations [nations, peoples], and languages,^ That at what time the time
that] ye hear [shall hear] the sound of the cornet [horn], flute, harp, sackbut,
psaltery, dulcimer [symphony], and all kinds of music, ye fall down and
6 worship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king hath set up: and
whoso [Zti.who that] falleth not [lit. shall not fall] doionund worshippeth, shall the
same hour [lit.m it the moment] be cast into </(e midst of a [or, the] burning
7 fiery furnace [lit. o\Qn of fire the blazing]. Therefore at that [lit. in it the] time,
when [lit. as that] all the people heard [nations were hearing] the sound of the
cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, and all kinds of music,' all the people, the
nations, and the languages, fell [were falling] down and worshipped [worshippinir]
8 the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up. Wherefore at