Professor of Old Testament Exegesis in Garrett Biblical Institute. DEVIS NEW YORK: HUNT & EATON 1893 Copyright, 1893, by HUNT & EATON, NEW YORK. Electrotyped, printed, and bound by 150 Fifth Avenue, New York. THIS little volume does not aim to furnish a commentary on the Book of Daniel, but consists rather of a series of exegetical essays on the apocalyptical portions of the book. It is sent forth with a hope of correcting, to some extent, the unsound methods of interpretation from which, we believe, this series of prophecies has greatly suffered. With a number of English expositors it would seem that the chief mission of Daniel, during the time of the Babylonian exile, was to foretell the rise. and fall of the Roman papacy; and one might almost infer, from the tone and spirit with which some of them write, that, if this darling idea of theirs is to be rejected, the book would scarcely be entitled to a place in the inspired canon of Scriptures. There is also a singularly persistent presumption, fostered, no doubt, by the class of works just referred to, that the Book of Daniel and the Apocalypse of John may be reasonably expected to contain a prophetic syllabus of European politics. Ancient and mediæval history has, accordingly, been ransacked to find particular persons, kingdoms, and events answering to the supposed allusions of the inspired prophet. One may well be amazed at the amount of imperious dogmatism displayed in the writings of some who follow the line of such unwarranted assumptions. A sound interpretation of these prophecies has also been embarrassed by an obvious desire, on the part of some theologians, to make the book a special contribution to apologetics. However commendable such a desire in itself, it is safe to say that, when interpretation is made subservient to such an ulterior polemic purpose, it will inevitably be too much governed by considerations outside the province of pure exegesis. In the study of such a work as Daniel all dogmatism must be set aside. We should study to place ourselves in the very position of the prophet, and attend carefully to the character of his language and his symbols. The ancient writer must be permitted, as far as possible, to explain himself; and the interpreter should not be so full of ideas derived from universal history, or from remote ages and peoples, as to desire to find in any prophecy what is not manifestly there. It is fatal to a safe interpretation of any book to presume in advance what ought or what ought not to be found therein. We believe the best defense of the Book of Daniel may be found in a simple and self-consistent exposition of its prophetic elements. These are of such profound significance and imperishable worth that, when clearly apprehended in their relation to one another, and in their historical connection with the pre Christian literature of the Jewish people, they carry with them their own self-evidencing apology. Whatever may be the results of scientific criticism touching the date and authorship of the book, the apocalyptic chapters constitute a most original and important body of divine revelation. Whether written during the exile, or in the times of the Maccabees, they contain a picture of the kingdoms of the world and their ultimate subjection to the kingdom of God worthy of rank with any prophecies to be found in the Hebrew Scriptures. Nowhere else do we find, before the advent of Christ, such a magnificent conception of the kingdom of heaven. The English text on which the following comments are based is mainly that of the Anglico-American Revision of 1885. But, |