Daniel

The book of Daniel contains accounts of several visions. These visions predict the coming of four kingdoms, followed by the Kingdom of God. The visions are interrelated. Examining these interrelationships is an important hermeneutic for interpreting them. Context is always important studying Scripture. In addition to the immediate historical circumstances of each individual vision, the visions taken as a whole form a context for each other.

These visions are usually described as being apocalyptic. The popular meaning of the word is somewhat misleading here. In this context, "apocalyptic" does not mean "forecasting the ultimate destiny of the world"[1] precisely. Rather, "apocalyptic" here describes the form, not the content. The apocalyptic form has two parts. The first part is the vision proper. It is an often strange or bizarre vision where the elements of the vision have symbolic meanings. The second part is an interpretation, often, but not always, done by an angel who is guiding the prophet through the vision.

Space does not permit covering apologetic issues regarding the date of composition and authorship of Daniel in detail. However, the conclusions drawn from studying the relationships between the visions, and how they relate to New Testament allusions to Daniel, will be one factor (of many) pointing to a solution to the apologetic issues.

The Visions

Daniel 2:31-45 -- The Statue

The first Apocalyptic vision breaks with the classical form somewhat. It isn't the prophet of God who has the vision, but a pagan king. Instead of an angel providing the prophet with an interpretation, it is the prophet who provides the pagan king an explanation, although we probably wouldn't be straying far from the truth if we presumed that an angel gave Daniel the vision and explanation the night before.

The central symbol in this vision is a large statue divided into four sections. Each is explicitly identified as a kingdom. Only the first is explicitly identified, as Nebuchadnezzar (i.e., the Babylonian Empire... note the interchangeability of the king with the kingdom, here and elsewhere). The others are not identified, but they are terminated with a fifth kingdom, the Kingdom of God, symbolized by a boulder that destroys the statue, becomes a mountain and fills the whole earth.

By comparing the scheme of four kingdoms followed by the Kingdom of God with analogous symbols in other visions in Daniel (see Comparison chart below), we will be able to positively identify the other three kingdoms.

Daniel 7:2-14, 17-18, 23-27 -- The Four Beasts

The second Apocalyptic vision is purely of classical form. Daniel has a vision of four beasts rising out of the sea, then an angel gives a partial explanation (that each beast is a king), though without explicitly identifying the kingdoms.

The identity of the first beast is pretty clear: Babylon. The winged lion image is common in Babylonian iconography. The reference to the beast being given a human mind and standing up like a human being is certainly an allusion to Nebuchadnezzar's mental illness and recovery (Daniel 4). The sequence of kingdoms is terminated by the Kingdom of God. As both envision a sequence of four kingdoms, starting with Babylon, and followed by the Kingdom of God, we may logically conclude that the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th kingdoms of each vision most likely correspond. This is further confirmed by the fact that the fourth kingdom in each vision has a number of parallels: both use the iron image, the feet image, refer to crushing, and involve the number ten (toes and horns respectively).

The vision of the statue provides few details for the second and third kingdoms, so there aren't any parallels readily identifiable for them, but the process of elimination should make us confident they correspond between the two visions. The second kingdom would seem to be the Medo-Persian Empire. That the bear is raised up (taller?) on one side would symbolize the dominance of the Persians over the Medes, and the three ribs would then symbolize the early victories that made the empire into a 'super-power'. The third beast would then have to be the Greek Empire of Alexander the Great and the four kingdoms it split into after his death, the later symbolized by the four heads and wings.

Many interpreters split the Medo-Persian empire into separate Median and Persian empires[9] (usually assuming that the real author of Daniel erred in his understanding of history when he made the prophecies up). The effect is to understand the fourth beast as representing the Seleucid kingdom of Antiochus IV Epiphanes. It is during his reign that these skeptics believe Daniel was written, and thus must not have any accurate "prophecy" past that point in time. They would hold that the author was predicting the defeat of Antiochus followed immediately by a Messianic era, that of course didn't actually materialize. The third vision will demonstrate the errors of the skeptical interpretations, and confirm the traditional interpretation of the four kingdoms.

Daniel 8:1-14, 19-26 -- The Two Beasts

This vision has only two beasts representing two of the four kingdoms of the previous visions, although different species are involved. The first beast is a ram and has several parallels with the second beast of the Daniel 7 vision. The ram of this vision has two horns, with one longer than the other, and corresponds to the bear of the previous vision being raised up on one side (that is, one side being higher than the other). The ram butts in three directions, corresponding to the three ribs in the bear's mouth.

The interpretation phase of the apocalyptic vision tells us explicitly that this beast represents the Medio-Persian empire. Interpreting the second and third beast as separate Median and Persian empires as is popular in skeptical circles is simply not an option. Persia dominated the Medians in the empire, hence one side of the bear being raised up and one horn being longer than the other. The three ribs/three directions represent the conquests of Cyrus to establish his empire: The Medes in 550 BC, Lydia in 547 BC, and Babylon in 539 BC.[2]

The goat of this vision corresponds to the leopard of the previous vision. Although the goat initially had a single horn, it is broken and replaced with four horns, corresponding to the four heads and wings of the leopard. The interpretation tells us the first horn represents the king of Greece, and that the four horns that replace it represents the four kingdoms that arise from his nation. The allusion to Alexander the Great, and the four kingdoms headed by his generals after his death is clear. A single beast represents both phases of the Greek kingdom in both visions.

The vision goes on to speak of a small horn growing from one of the four. The allusion to Antiochus Epiphanes desecrating the temple and halting sacrifice for a period is clear. See below on Daniel 11-12 and 9.

Thus we can see that Daniel represents the Medio-Persian Empire by a single beast, and the Greek Empire and its successors by a single beast, and these correspond to the second and third beasts of the vision of chapter 7.

An interesting problem of interpretation is what does the phrase "the time of the end" mean in Daniel. On the face of it, one would expect it to mean eschatological times. However in Daniel 8:19, the angel says "the vision pertains to the appointed time of the end", yet the vision only deals with the second and third kingdoms. There is yet the fourth kingdom and the Kingdom of God. Here, "end" seems to refer only to the conclusion of specific divine sovereign plans, and not the end of "everything" (eschatology).

Daniel 11-12 -- The Battles of Kings

The account of this vision deviates significantly from the apocalyptic pattern. It only has the interpretation phase. Daniel 10:1 indicates there is a vision behind it, but it is not recorded in Scripture.

For the most part, it is outside the scope of this study to examine the details of the fulfillment of these predictions. We are interested primarily in how it relates to the other visions. Only the briefest outline of the correspondences between the vision and secular history will be given here. [3]

Daniel 11:2 predicts three more kings of Persia, then a fourth who will enter in conflict with Greece. These are readily identified as Cyrus successors: Cambyses (530-522 BC), Pseudo-Smerdis (522 BC), Darius I Hystaspas (522-486 BC) and Xerxes I (486-465 BC). The correspondence here is with the second kingdom (the Medo-Persian Empire).

There were more kings of Persia after Xerxes, but the vision jumps to the third kingdom. Daniel 11:3-4 clearly refers to Alexander the Great (340-323 BC) and the breakup of his kingdom into four after his death. Note that there is a little over a century gap between verses 2 and 3. verses 5-35 predict various exploits between "the king of the south" and "the king of the north". These are not individual single kings, but rather the Ptolomaic and Seleucid dynasties of Egypt and Syria respectively. The individual kings are readily identifiable from history. Note that the text itself gives little or no hint when the identity of "the king of the South" or "the king of the North" changes from one individual to another. Little distinction is made between the individual king, the office, and the kingdom in traditional despotic monarchies.

Daniel	Identity
11:5	king of South=Ptolemy I Soter, 322-285 BC; prince=Seleucus I Nicator, 312-280 BC
11:6	daughter=Berenice, daughter of Ptolemy II Philadelphus, 285-246 BC; alliance (c. 250 BC) between Antiochus II Theos (261-246 BC) and Ptolemy II
11:7	Ptolemy III Euergetes, 246-221 BC (brother of Berenice)
11:9	Seleuces II Callinicus (246-226 BC), unsuccessful campaign against Ptolemies 240 BC
11:10	his sons=Seluces III Ceraunus (226-223 BC); Antiochus III the Great (223-187 BC); his fortress=Raphia (major battle in 217 BC)
11:11	king of the South=Ptolemy IV Philopator, 221-203 BC; king of the North=Antiochus III
11:13	Antiochus III in alliance with Philip V of Macedon; Ptolomy IV died under mysterious circumstances, succeeded by 4-year-old Ptolemy V Epiphanes (203-181 BC)
11:15	Antiochus III's defeat over General Scopos in 198 BC - end of Ptolemaic rule in Palestine
11:17	Cleopatra given in marriage to Ptolemy V by Antiochus III, sought Roman help against her father
11:18	Roman general Lucius Cornelius Scipio defeats Antiochus III, takes son (Antiochus IV) hostage to Rome
11:20	Seleucus IV Philopator (187-175 BC)
11:21	Antiochus IV Ephiphanes (175-164 BC), but Seleucus IV had son who was legitimate heir
11:22	Prince of the covenant=high priest Onias III, assassinated by supporters of Antiochus IV in 171 BC
11:25	king of he South=Ptolemy VI Philometer
11:30	ships from Cyprus=Roman armies under Gaius Popilius Laenas who forced Antiochus IV to retreat from Egypt

Of particular interest is Antiochus IV Epiphanes in Daniel 11:21 ff, who precipitated the Maccabean revolt when he banned the Jewish religion, desecrated the temple, and halted the sacrifices (temporarily).

Up through 11:35, the correspondence with the third beast with its division into four kingdoms is clear and the identification with historical persons is straightforward. Daniel 11:36-45 present special difficulties though. Verse 36 reads "Then the king will do as he pleases..." without specifying "king of the north", "king of the south", or "king of whatever". There are three views of how to interpret this. The Dispensational view considers him to be the king of the north. In verse 40, "At the time of the end the king of the South will attack him", the pronoun "him" would refer to the king of the North being attacked by the king of the South, and "then the king of the north will storm against him", the pronoun "him" would refer to the king of the South being stormed against by the king of the North. In this view, the king of the North is the eschatological Antichrist. That is, the sequence of events predicted suddenly jumps forward thousands of years. (For the meaning of "the time of the end" see above on chapter 8.)

The skeptical view also treats "the king" in verse 36 as the king of the North. In this view, the pseudo-prophet has "predicted" the events leading up to his own time during the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes. He then proceeds to try to guess what is next, but gets the circumstances of Antiochus' defeat wrong.

While it is possible grammatically, it is also awkward. Every single other reference to the kings of the North and South included the "North" or "South" specification. Since chapter 12 clearly looks forward to the Kingdom of God, and we've already seen that the Greek kingdoms were the third beast, the skeptical view requires us to skip the fourth kingdom. Thus, the most reasonable view is that "the king" in is neither the king of the North nor the South, but is a separate king, in conflict with both the other kings (both pronouns in verse 40 would refer back to him). This is the most straightforward reading of the passage. The king would then correspond to the fourth beast. The obvious candidate for historical fulfillment of the fourth kingdom is Rome.[4]

In chapter 12, verse 1's description of a time of distress is similar to Jesus description of suffering in the Olivet Discourse (see esp. Mk 13:19), which predicts the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. Verse 2 is difficult. It says "Many of those who sleep in the dusty ground [ie, are dead] will awake". This is an obvious resurrection reference, but the difficulty is that it refers only to "many of" the dead, not all of the dead. "Many" doesn't necessarily even imply a majority of the dead. Some translations gloss over this my translating "Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake" [NIV] or "And the multitude of those sleeping in the dust of the ground do awake" [YLT], but most translations stick to what the Hebrew text actually says. If Daniel isn't referring to the universal resurrection of all the dead, then what might he be referring to? Does the Bible anywhere teach about a pre-eschatological resurrection of a portion of the dead? Yes! Matthew[5] says:

Jesus' teaching about the Kingdom of God was never about a political kingdom, but a spiritual one. He proclaimed it as imminent at the beginning of his ministry ("Repent! For the kingdom of heaven is near" [Mt 4:17], "But if I cast out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has already overtaken you" [Lk 11:20]), and described it as an spiritual rather than political reality:

Daniel 9:24-27 -- Seventy Weeks

This vision, like Daniel 11-12, does not have an account of visual imagery, but just an Angel conveying the message directly to Daniel. There are a number of translation and interpretation difficulties with the passage that I want to briefly overview here.

Contextually, Daniel has just prayed for the ending of 70 years captivity, as had been prophesied by Jeremiah. Daniel is told that there are yet 70 "weeks" (literally "sevens"; the usual word for "week" is not the word used here) to be fulfilled. These "sevens" are usually understood to be weeks of years (ie, seven years). Something other than a period of 490 24-hour days seems to be what is in view here. (Much ink has been spilled in attempting to understand what each phrase in this verse means, but that is beyond the scope of this paper. See the Bibliography for a sampling of literature on the topic.)

The seventy "weeks" are split into three periods: 7, 62, and 1 "week(s)". The significance of the split between the 7 and the 62 "weeks" is enigmatic. Many interpreters attach the 62 weeks to the following sentence, having "an anointed one, a prince" appear after 7 "weeks", and the city built after an additional 62 "weeks". But the anointed one also appears after the 62 "weeks" (over 4 centuries later!) in the next verse. Unless the 70 "weeks" are actually calendar weeks, this is very unlikely.

A second problem is that verse 25 seems to refer to one person, "an anointed one, a prince", while in verse 26, the anointed one and the prince are two separate people. It would seem a single letter, waw, that looks very similar to the adjacent letters, het and nun, has dropped from the text (dygI�n" x:yvi�m' vs dygI�n"w> x:yvi�m'). Since they enter the picture after the 62 "weeks", it is the reconstruction of Jerusalem that would appear to be what is happening after the 7 "weeks".

This interpretation of the first 69 "weeks" works out quite nicely (and precisely!) without resorting to "prophetic years" and other such questionable devices one encounters in many other attempts to interpret them. See the bibliography for these other interpretations.

A whole bunch of things take place after the 62 "weeks". A messiah and a prince arrive. The messiah is cut off. The city and sanctuary (temple) are destroyed. the sacrifices come to a halt. Dispensationalist have long held there to be a gap between the end of the 62 "weeks" and the final "week". I'm inclined to agree. But the final week is not eschatological. It is the Jewish-Roman war, which lasted 7 years, and in the middle of which, Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed. The prince would have been the Roman emperor.

Jesus, in the Olivet Discourse (Mk 13 and parallels), sites the desolating abomination[10] in Daniel (Mk 13:14, Lk 21:20-21, Mt 24:15-16) and Luke's version explicitly identifies it as Jerusalem being surrounded by armies (ie, the Roman armies), leaving no doubt as to how this passage is interpreted by the Jesus and the New Testament.

Comparison

The Kingdoms

Now we've looked at each vision one at a time and related it to the others briefly. We'll now recap by examining each kingdom in turn.

First Kingdom -- Babylon

In the vision of the statue, Daniel explicitly identifies the first of the four kingdoms (the head of gold) as Babylon. Allusions to Babylonian iconography and Nebuchadnezzar are evident in the lion, the first beast of the vision of four beasts, also. Babylon is not dealt with in the remaining visions. This is because they date to near the end of the Babylonian empire (Dan 8:1) or to the Medo-Persian period (Dan 9:1, 11:1): Babylon was waning or gone then.

Second Kingdom -- Medo-Persia

The chest and arms of silver is not identified in the vision of the statue: only that it is a kingdom that will follow the Babylonian kingdom. It corresponds to the bear, the second beast in the vision of four kingdoms, and the ram, the first beast in the vision of two beasts. The ram is explicitly identified as the dual Medo-Persian empire. The parallels between the bear and the ram confirm that they are symbolizing the same kingdom.

The vision of the battles between kings briefly mentions the Medo-Persian empire by enumerating four kings before the Persians enter into conflict with the Greeks. At that point, the vision skips the remainder of the Persian period, jumping directly to Alexander the Great.

Clearly, we can't split the Median and Persian empires into two in the visions. Not only is it historically inaccurate (what Median kingdom there was had been concurrent with the Babylonian empire, not its successor) but it is forced onto the text only with great violence to its meaning and integrity.

Third Kingdom -- The Greek Empires

The parallels between the third beast, the leopard, of the vision of four beasts, and the second beast, the goat, of the vision of two beasts, makes their identity secure. The goat is explicitly identified as the Greek kingdom which gets divided between four subsequent kings. The allusion to Alexander the Great and the division of his empire among four of his generals is unmistakable. The leopard with four heads clearly symbolizes the same division info four simultaneous leaders. The vision of the battles between kings provides remarkable details of the interactions between two of them (Syria and Egypt).

Fourth Kingdom -- The Roman Empire

The fourth beast is not identified in scripture: neither its species nor its national identity. Rather we identify it partially be the process of elimination (it is the kingdom between the Greeks and Christ) and partly by discovering parallels between Rome and the symbols in the visions.

The fourth beast was different from all that came before it (7:7). Further it had ten horns at the same time (7:7). The horns do not represent a series of kings, but contemporaneous rulers. Three of the horns are supplanted by an additional horn (7:8). Rome was different from all previous empires in that it was a Republic. Instead, it was ruled by a senate. The supplanting of three horns by one represents the transition from the government head being a triumvirate to being a single emperor. It is no coincidence that the ten toes of the statue in the first vision are explicitly mentioned. They represent the same thing.

Skeptics try to equate the eleventh horn with Antiochus IV Epiphanes, but his circumstances ill fit the description of multiple contemporaneous rulers implied by the horns. Compare this with the horn symbolism in the vision of two beasts where the first beast has two horns of different size representing the imbalance between the Medes and Persians, and the second beast has one horn, which is replaced by four horns, representing Alexander the Great, and after his death, the four contemporaneous kingdom created by his four generals.

Dispensationalists propose a gap between the third and fourth kingdoms not alluded to in scripture and regard the fourth kingdom as a future kingdom of the Antichrist. But even they often regard that kingdom as a Roman Empire reborn. The text provides no such hint of a multi-millennia gap. Rather, we must side with Calvin who clearly saw the Roman Empire reflected through out the description of the fourth empire.[4]

The Kingdom of God

The Kingdom of God is not an eschatological concept, limited to a future millenium with Christ ruling physically on the earth. As noted earlier, Christ preached an imminent Kingdom of God.

In the vision of the statue, the stone that strikes the statue then changes into a mountain that fills the whole earth (2:35). This more aptly matches the post-millennial expectation of Christianity eventually spreading over the whole earth through a gradual process rather than the cataclysmic advent expected by Dispensationalists or even amillennialists.

In the vision of four beasts, the theophany of verse 7:9-10 is not an eschatological judgment scene. 7:12 makes it clear that life goes on. New Testament references to 7:13-14 are especially informative. The "coming" of "one like a son of man" is a coming of the son of man to the "Ancient of Days". That is, he is coming to heaven, not to earth in a Parousia. Two things Jesus said illustrate what event is actually in view here. After the first time he predicted his death and resurrection he said:

In these statements, we see Jesus explicitly claiming fulfillment of the predictions of the Kingdom of God in the events occurring there in about 30 AD.

Daniel 12 also looks to the inauguration of the Kingdom of God. It looks to the great distress to the Jewish people experienced in the Jewish revolt, as Jesus also spoke about in the Olivet Discourse. It also makes a remarkable prediction about the resurrection of many of the dead, an event we see happening when Jesus was resurrected.

Daniel 9 makes the most remarkable prediction. It points to the actual date of the incarnation! It was these predictions that fueled the Messianic expectations of the first century Jews[7, 8]. Jesus also cited these predictions in the Olivet Discourse, and Luke made it certain that it was the Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem that were the "desolating abomination".

Notes

Daniel 2	Daniel 7	Daniel 8	Daniel 11-12	Daniel 9
2:31-32 Statue; head of gold; 2:37-38 Represents Nebuchadnezzar	7:2-4 Beast like a lion with eagles' wings, wings pulled off and made to stand like a human being and human mind given to it; 7:17 Each beast represents a king
2:32 Chest and arms of silver; 2:39 An inferior kingdom after the first	7:5 Beast like a bear, raised up on one side, three ribs in its mouth, told to devour much flesh; 7:17 Each beast represents a king	8:1-4 Ram with two horns, one longer than the other, butting west, north, and south; 8:19-20 time of the end, ram with two horns is kings of Media and Persia	11:2 Next four kings of Persia
2:32 Belly and thighs of brass; 2:39 A third kingdom	7:6 Beast like a leopard, four wings, four heads, ruling authority; 7:17 Each beast represents a king	8:5-14 Goat from the west, horn between eyes, defeated ram, horn broken, replaced with four horns, extending to the four winds, from one horn a small horn grew, great airs, halted sacrifice, desolating transgression, then sanctuary vindicated; 8:21-26 Goat is king of Greece, single horn is first king, four horns are four kings arising from first king's nation, little horn is rash and duplicitous king, will rise up against the Prince of princes, but will be broken	11:3-35 Powerful king, kingdom distributed to others, exploits of the kings of the south and north	9:24 Seventy weeks
2:33 Legs of iron, feet of iron mixed with clay; 2:40-43 A fourth kingdom, strength of iron to break and crush others, divided, toes part iron and part clay indicate part strong and part weak, people mixed and not adhering to one another	7:7-8 Dreadful beast, teeth of iron, devoured and crashed and trampled with its feet, different from previous beasts, ten horns, another horn comes up and tears out three of the previous horns, horn has human eyes and arrogant mouth; 7:17 Each beast represents a king; 7:23-25 fourth kingdom different from all the others, devour, trample, and crush the earth, ten horns are ten kingdoms, another king arises who humiliates three others, speaks words against Most High, harasses holy ones who are delivered to him time, times, and half a time		11:36-45 A king exalts himself above Deity, worships foreign god, god of fortresses, attacked by kings of north and south, the king invades the land of beauty, Edom, Moab and Ammonite leadership escape, Egypt does not, He will come to an end.	9:25-26 Messiah and prince comes after the 7+62 weeks, sacrifice ended, desolating abomination
2:34-35 Stone cut without human hands stuck statute and pulverized it, stone becomes large mountain filling entire earth; 2:44-45 God will bring an everlasting kingdom	7:9-14 Theophany, beast destroyed, son of man approaches Ancient of Days with the clouds of the sky, given eternal kingdom; 7:18 holy ones receive eternal kingdom; 7:26-27 fourth kings ruling authority removed, kingdom delivered to the holy ones, eternal kingdom		12:1-13 Time of distress, many of the dead awake, book to be sealed, enigmatic time references

[2] Young, T. Cuyler, "Cyrus" in Anchor Bible Dictionary. Many interpreters, rather than citing the defeat of Media, look to Egypt, which was conquered in 525 BC, as the third rib. This was by a later king however. I think it better to look at the activities of the founding king.

[5] One might also look at Revelation 20:4, but interpretation of Revelation is difficult and well beyond the scope of this study.

[6] Traditionally "within you", but as he was addressing Pharisees in opposition to him, he hardly meant within them as individuals, but rather within them as a group: among you. [NET note]

[7] Daniel. Word Biblical Commentary. p. xxvii "Partly on the basis of Dan 9 the Essenes were actually expecting the messiah between 3 B.C. and A.D. 2." p. xxix 2 Esdr. identifies the fourth empire as Rome. Josephus also believed that Daniel wrote of Rome.

[8] Walton. "The Four Kingdoms of Daniel". JETS 20. p. 26 "There is no question that the earliest Jewish interpreters favored the Roman view.... The evidence in the writings of the Church fathers is massive and in unison in favor of the Roman view."

[9] Laymon, Interpreter's, for example. p. 440 identifies the 2nd through 4th parts of the statue as the Medes (which it points out as an error on Daniel's part since the Medes were contemporary of Babylon), the Persian Empire, and the Macedonian-Greek Empire without even considering alternatives. p. 445 make the same identifications for the 4 beasts, noting that the second beast "represents the Median Empire, which the author [of Daniel] mistakenly believed had savagely torn at Babylon" and struggles with guess for the meaning of the four heads of the third beast which similarly doesn't fit the Persian Empire.

Bibliography

Archer, Gleason L., Jr. (Apr-Jun 1979). "Modern Rationalism and the Book of Daniel". Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol 136 #542.

Armerding, Carl. (Apr-Jun 1964). "Daniel 12:1-3: Asleep in the Dust". Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol 121 #482.

Barker, Kenneth L. (Spring 1993). "Premillennialism in the Book of Daniel". Master's Seminary Journal, Vol 4:1.

Beale, G. K. (December 1984). "The Influence Of Daniel Upon The Structure And Theology Of John's Apocalypse". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Vol 27:4.

Bullock, C. H. (1986). An introduction to the Old Testament prophetic books. Moody Press

Collins, John J. "Daniel, Book of". in Freedman, D. N. (1992). The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Doubleday

Fox, Doublas E. (Fall 1987). "Ben Sira on OT Canon Again: The Date of Daniel". Westminster Theological Journal, Vol 49:2.

Gangel, Kenneth O. (Fall 1985). "A Vision of Future World History". Grace Theological Journal, Vol 6:2.

Harton, George M. (Fall 1983). "An Interpretation of Daniel 11:36-45". Grace Theological Journal, Vol 4:2.

Hayford, J. W., & Curtis, G. (1994). Until the End of Time : Revealing the Future of Humankind: A study of Daniel and Revelations. Spirit-Filled Life Bible Discovery Guides. Thomas Nelson.

Hippolytus "On Daniel" in Roberts, A., Donaldson, J., & Coxe, A. C. The Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol. V

Hoehner, Harold W. (Jan-Mar 1975). "Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ". Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol 132 #525.

Howard, David. M., Jr. "Daniel" in Freedman, D. N. (1992). The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Doubleday

Jerome. "Daniel" in Schaff, P. The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Second Series Vol. VI

Julius Africanus. "On the Seventy Weeks of Daniel" in Roberts, A., Donaldson, J., & Coxe, A. C.. The Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol. VI

Keil, C. F. & Delitzsch, F. (1891). Commentary on the Old Testament. Hendrickson.

Laymon, Charles M. (1971). The Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary of the Bible. Abingdon.

Lurie, David H. (September 1990). "A New Interpretation of Daniel's 'Sevens' And The Chronology Of The Seventy 'Sevens'". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Vol. 33:3.

McComiskey, Thomas Edward (Spring 1985). "The Seventy 'Weeks' of Daniel against the Background of Ancient Near Eastern Literature". Westminster Theological Journal, Vol 47:2.

Miller, S. R. (1994). Vol. 18: Daniel. The New American Commentary. Broadman & Holman Publishers.

Mills, M. (1998). Daniel : A study guide to the book of Daniel. 3E Ministries.

Newman, Robert C. (Fall 1973). "Daniel's Seventy Weeks And The Old Testament Sabbath-Year Cycle'. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Vol. 16:4.

Packer, J., Tenney, M. C., & White, W. (1995). Nelson's illustrated manners and customs of the Bible. Thomas Nelson.

Patterson, Richard D. (Fall 1991). "The Key Role of Daniel 7". Grace Theological Journal, Vol 12:2.

Patterson, Richard D. (December 1993). "Holding On To Daniel's Court Tales". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Volume 36:4.

Payne, J. Barton. (June 1978) "The Goal of Daniel's Seventy Weeks" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Volume 21:2.

Pierce, Ronald W. (Fall 1989). "Spiritual Failure, Postponement, And Daniel 9". Trinity Journal, Vol 10:2.

Ray, Charles H. (2001-2002). "A Study of Daniel 9:24-27". Conservative Theological Journal, Vol 5:15, 5:16, 6:17, 6:18.

Roscup, James E. (Spring 1992). "Prayer Relating to Prophecy in Daniel 9". Master's Seminary Journal, Vol. 3:1.

Showers, Renald E. (Winter 1970). "New Testament Chronology and the Decree of Daniel 9". Grace Theological Journal, Vol 11:1.

Sproul, R. C. and Packer, J. I. (1995). New Geneva Study Bible. Thomas Nelson.

Stevens, David E. (Oct-Dec 2000). "Daniel 10 and the Notion of Territorial Spirit". Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol. 157 #628.

Tanner, J. Paul. (September 1992). "Daniel's 'King Of The North': Do We Owe Russia An Apology?". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Volume 35:3.

Vasholz, Robert I. (December, 1978). "Qumran And The Dating Of Daniel". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Vol. 21:4.

Waltke, Bruce K. (Oct-Dec 1976). "The Date of the Book of Daniel". Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol 133, #532.

Walton, John H. (March 1986). "The Four Kingdoms Of Daniel". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Vol 29:1.

Walton, John H. (September 1988). "The Decree of Darius The Mede In Daniel 6". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Vol 31:3.

Walvoord, John F. (Jan-Mar 1944). "Is the Seventieth Week of Daniel Future?". Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol 101 #401.

Woodard, Branson L. (March 1994). "Literary Strategies And Authorship in The Book Of Daniel". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Vol 37:1.

Yamauchi, Edwin M. (March 1980). "Hermeneutical Issues In The Book Of Daniel". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Vol. 23:1.

The Kingdom Visions in Daniel

Introduction