Understanding the OT book of Daniel

[Vanellus]

Reading an Introduction to the Old Testament I came across this on Daniel:

"The four kingdoms symbolized by the four beasts represent those which we have seen (i.e. Babylon, Media, Persia and Macedon), and cannot in any way be applied to persons and institutions from our own time. The horn is Antiochus IV and not, say, Hitler, Stalin or any other baneful figure of our day"

Now I agree with this and don't think this makes this part of Daniel irrelevant to us today as it teaches us how Jews at the time regarded the larger nations around them(and what God told them via the prophet). But I know there are some here who may disagree. Thoughts?

 

[BobRyan]

Reading an Introduction to the Old Testament I came across this on Daniel:

"The four kingdoms symbolized by the four beasts represent those which we have seen (i.e. Babylon, Media, Persia and Macedon), and cannot in any way be applied to persons and institutions from our own time. The horn is Antiochus IV and not, say, Hitler, Stalin or any other baneful figure of our day"

Now I agree with this and don't think this makes this part of Daniel irrelevant to us today as it teaches us how Jews at the time regarded the larger nations around them. But I know there are some here who may disagree. Thoughts?

Part of it is true.

"The four kingdoms (In Daniel 7) symbolized by the four beasts represent those which we have seen"

(i.e. Babylon, Medes-and-Persians, Greece, Rome)

All of them empires in the past.

But Daniel 7 goes beyond that - to the point of the second coming of Christ as can be seen at the end of the chapter.

======================

Daniel 7 includes the 1260 years of dark ages starting at some time after the fall of the pagan Roman Empire and ends in 1798 with the fall of the Holy Roman Empire dominated by Italy through the Catholic Church.

Daniel 7 ends with the second coming of Christ -- like this --

23 “This is what he said: ‘The fourth beast will be a fourth kingdom on the earth which will be different from all the other kingdoms, and will devour the whole earth and trample it down and crush it. 24 As for the ten horns, out of this kingdom ten kings will arise; and another will arise after them, and he will be different from the previous ones and will humble three kings. 25 And he will speak against the Most High and wear down the saints of the Highest One, and he will intend to make alterations in times and in law; and they will be handed over to him for a time, times, and half a time. 26 But the court will convene for judgment, and his dominion will be taken away, annihilated and destroyed forever. 27 Then the sovereignty, the dominion, and the greatness of all the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be given to the people of the saints of the Highest One; His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all the empires will serve and obey Him.’

 

[Vanellus]

I don't see 1260 years in Daniel 7.

 

[BobRyan]

I don't see 1260 years in Daniel 7.

Do you see 490 years in Daniel 9? (it points to the first coming of Christ)

1. All apocalyptic timelines such as Daniel 9 - use day-for-year.
2. All Bible timelines are contiguous.

So then the 70 years of Jeremiah in Daniel 9:1-6 are contiguous.
The 3 days and 3 nights that Christ mentioned - are contiguous
The 1260 years in Dan7 (time, times, half a time) = 3.5 years - are contiguous

In Rev 11, 12 we see that (time, times, half a time) = 42 months = 1260 days.
And the same day-for-year as in all apocalyptic times lines - means it is in fact 1260 years in Daniel 7 -- accurately predicting not only the 4th empire the pagan Roman empire - but also 1260 years of dark ages persecution of the saints.

 

[Vanellus]

Thanks for responding as dialogue is a helpful way of learning

I don't think this "day for year" formula is ever explicitly laid out in the Bible as for instance by
" 'In this book a day means a year' saith the Lord"
so I think you must be interring it from examples: circular argument?

After them another king, different from the earlier ones, will rise and subdue three kings. 25He will speak out against the Most High and oppress the saints of the Most High, intending to change the appointed times and laws; and the saints will be given into his hand for a time, and times, and half a time.

So the problem here is that this word, translated as time, doesn't necessarily mean year.

1 in General, time, as duration Daniel 2:8; Daniel 7:12; involving specific conditions Daniel 2:9,21; (point of) time Daniel 3:5,15.

2 definite time, = year (as modern Greek χρόνος, see EASophocles1173): ׳שִׁבְעָה ע = seven years, Daniel 4:16; Daniel 4:23; Daniel 4:25; Daniel 4:32; עִדָּן וְעִדָּנִין וּפְלַג עִדָּן Daniel 7:25 (i.e. 3 2-Janyears, see Dr; perhaps read dual for plural, compare Bev GunkSchöpf. 201).

and 1260 is obtained thinking that the contemporary view for Daniel was that a year consisted of 360 days.

Of course we do get a value close to 1260 towards the end of the book (1290 - intercalary month inserted?) but that specifically refers to days not years and doesn't use this time, times. half time formula. The historicist view of this passage in Daniel 12 is that this is persecution of the Jews under Antiochus IV; the futurist view is persecution of the saints by an antichrist figure but in each case it is days rather than years that is considered.

In Daniel 7 "saint" is an Aramaic loan word meaning "holy one" so not necessarily "saint" in the NT sense (as in a member of the NT church)

“Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish d transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place

Note the word is translated as "seven" not "week" which weakens your day=year argument.

shabua: a period of seven (days, years), heptad, week
Original Word: שְׁבוּעַ
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: shabua
Phonetic Spelling: (shaw-boo'-ah)
Definition: a period of seven (days, years), heptad, week

So it can mean a heptad of seven years rather than a week of seven days so there is no need for a day=year formula (though I guess you'll take that as evidence for your preferred equivalence)

Quoting from Longman/Dillard Intro to OT

"Unfortunately, though, Christian interest in this book has too often become obsessed with the puzzle of the time schemes of the book"

The nice round number-ness of all the periods suggests at least a degree of symbolism

I do hope you won't come back along the lines of "what do they know, I know better" kind of answer!