Hot answers tagged

11

The relevant bit of Daniel 10:3 reads as follows: ... וְהִנֵּה מִיכָאֵל אַחַד הַשָּׂרִים הָרִאשֹׁנִים בָּא לְעָזְרֵנִי ... ... but, behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me ... OP has two intertwining interests: (1) the primary question is about the meaning here of "one" in Hebrew; but secondarily (2) how does this relate to the ...


9

Dan 12,12: לְיָמִ֕ים אֶ֕לֶף שְׁלֹ֥שׁ מֵאֹ֖ות שְׁלֹשִׁ֥ים וַחֲמִשָּֽׁה׃ Literally: to days thousand three hundreds thirty and five The KJV has “five and thirty” instead of “thirty and five” because this was the more common way to express compound numbers in 17th-century English. None of this has anything to do with lunar or solar calendars.


8

There are a whole host of explanations that have been proffered. Most of this answer is based on this book which summarises the consensus opinion that the first six chapters and the remaining ones constitute two separate sections (textually that isn't difficult to see, the first section is narrative and the second visionary, they also run chronologically ...


8

The Daniel of the biblical book is דָּנִיֵּאל, while in Ezek 14:14 and 28:3 it is דָּנִאֵל and this has led to division of opinion among scholars as to the identification of this particular individual. Prior to more recent discoveries in the ruins of Ugarit that unearthed the "the Story of Aqht" and has led some scholars including Zimmerli to identify this ...


7

In Hebrew אחד is a cardinal number. The names of the days of the week are formed from cardinal numbers, so what we call “Sunday” is “day one” in Hebrew, and thus also in the Greek and Latin Bibles, but the English translators render this as “the first day”, only because this sounds more natural in English. But אחד does not actually ever mean “first”. The ...


7

I will not specifically reference spelling differences, since names in Scripture often bear different spellings. While such could indicate a different person, it need not, so spelling difference alone is not enough to make a judgment one way or another about who the referent is. Regarding Daniel's Reputation Yes, Daniel was young. But if one follows the ...


7

Although the prominence of long lists in the court tales of Daniel is often noted by commentators, I am aware of only one study devoted to understanding their use in the book, and their relation to literary conventions in the ancient Near East: Peter W. Coxon, "The 'List' Genre and Narrative Style in the Court Tales of Daniel", Journal for the Study of the ...


6

The most important arguement for a late date is that if Daniel were written in the 6th Century BC, it would mean that predictive prophecy had occurred, an astounding thing. Other less significant arguments are related to Darius the Mede not being attested to in history, and other less significant issues. Evidence for an early date are these: Daniel ...


6

The Dream In Daniel 2:31-36 Daniel recounts Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the statue to him. After the statue is described, Daniel says the following: You continued looking until a stone was cut out without hands, and it struck the statue on its feet of iron and clay and crushed them. Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver and the gold were crushed ...


6

The Hebrew Bible uses the verb חָתַם in two ways. The first is the common use of seal as royal cachet. The idea here is that the king's edict is irreversible. Thus Jezebel (1 Ki 21:8) and Mordecai (Esther 8:8) seal the royal decrees as mandates "ex officio" from the king. The seal was therefore the explicit authority of the king. The second and related use ...


5

Further argument for a late date Not only does Daniel seem able to prophesy events close to the time of 167 BCE accurately, although not the relevant events that occurred shortly after this time, but its narrative around the chronology of the Exile seems flawed. Chapter 8 is in the time of Babylonian rule, then Daniel 9:1 is the first year of Darius, son of ...


5

Daniel 7:27 reads: ומלכותה ושלטנא ורבותא די מלכות תחות כל־שמיא יהיבת לעם קדישי עליונין מלכותה מלכות עלם וכל שלטניא לה יפלחון וישתמעון׃ First of all, this is not Hebrew but Aramaic. The third word from the end (in bold) is l-eh, with the suffix for the third person singular masculine. It could mean “to him” (that is: to the most high one), but since the ...


5

The MT of Daniel 10:21 is: אֲבָל֙ אַגִּ֣יד לְךָ֔ אֶת־הָרָשׁ֥וּם בִּכְתָ֖ב אֱמֶ֑ת וְאֵ֨ין אֶחָ֜ד מִתְחַזֵּ֤ק עִמִּי֙ עַל־אֵ֔לֶּה כִּ֥י אִם־מִיכָאֵ֖ל שַׂרְכֶֽם The language is late Biblical Hebrew prose, whose grammar is relatively close to modern Hebrew. The words in question are in bold, transliterated as b'ctav emet. emet emet is "true". In the ...


5

They are literal days. This vision concerns the rise of Antiochus IV Epiphianes and the Maccabean Revolt during the 2nd cent. BC. The time period is pin pointed by verses 20 - 21. "20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. 21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is ...


5

Great question that has been asked many times in various ways on this site previously. Let me quote John 1:18 according to the ESV. No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known. The BSB is even more pointed. (The NIV and others have something similar). No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who ...


5

Each army had a multiple of tens of thousands on both sides of the battle of Raphia. According to Polybius' history Ptolemy IV had 70,000 foot soldiers, 5,000 horse and 73 elephants; while Antiochus III had 62,000 foot soldiers, 6,000 horse, and 102 elephants. (1)(2) The verse is translated better in Young's. "and he hath carried away the multitude, ...


4

Although many sources claim otherwise, it is clear after examining the scripture, that the man whom Daniel encounters is NOT Jesus Christ. When people compare Daniel's vision of this angel to the similarity of John's vision of Christ in Revelation they do not seem to take notice of the differences in the details of their descriptions. Revelation 1:13 ...


4

It's actually the opposite. Angels might be referred to as "sons of God" (see Job) but never as "a son of man." It should also be noted that his wording is awkward. 1 Enoch is a pre-Christian work, as you note in your question. To refer to an angel as a "son of man" goes against everything in Jewish thinking. They simply aren't. edit: Russell also seems to ...


4

Daniel 7:4 (NASB): The first was like a lion and had the wings of an eagle. I kept looking until its wings were plucked, and it was lifted up from the ground and made to stand on two feet like a man; a human mind also was given to it. The MT: קַדְמָיְתָא כְאַרְיֵה וְגַפִּין דִּי נְשַׁר לַהּ חָזֵה הֲוֵית עַד דִּי מְּרִיטוּ גַפַּיהּ וּנְטִילַת מִן ...


4

The word spelt ndn in both Hebrew and Aramaic means "sheath" (for a sword). Aramaic ndnh means "its sheath" (with the pronominal suffix for the 3rd person singular). It is a loanword from Old Persian. Here in Dan. 7:15 it is used figuratively, of course. The body encompasses the soul in the same way that a sheath contains a sword. http://cal1.cn.huc.edu/...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible