{"commentary":{"id":"jamieson-fausset-brown","name":"Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary","website":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamieson-Fausset-Brown_Bible_Commentary","licenseUrl":"https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/","licenseNotes":null,"licenseNotice":null,"englishName":"Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary","language":"eng","textDirection":"rtl","sha256":"db3d4c8b3c1f32ef9d1430a57392e02bda3a17aac1f9bbe398461de021a3cb13","availableFormats":["json"],"listOfBooksApiLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/books.json","listOfProfilesApiLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/profiles.json","numberOfBooks":66,"totalNumberOfChapters":1187,"totalNumberOfVerses":17056,"totalNumberOfProfiles":0,"languageName":"English","languageEnglishName":"English"},"book":{"id":"DAN","commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","name":"Daniel","commonName":"Daniel","introduction":"DANIEL, that is, \"God is my judge\"; probably of the blood royal (compare Dan 1:3, with Ch1 3:1, where a son of David is named so). Jerusalem may have been his birthplace (though Dan 9:24, \"thy holy city,\" does not necessarily imply this). He was carried to Babylon among the Hebrew captives brought thither by Nebuchadnezzar at the first deportation in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. As he and his three companions are called (Dan 1:4) \"children,\" he cannot have been more than about twelve years old when put in training, according to Eastern etiquette, to be a courtier (Dan 1:3, Dan 1:6). He then received a new name, by which it was usual to mark a change in one's condition (Kg2 23:34; Kg2 24:17; Ezr 5:14; Est 2:7), Belteshazzar, that is, \"a prince favored by Bel\" (Dan 1:7). His piety and wisdom were proverbial among his countrymen at an early period; probably owing to that noble proof he gave of faithfulness, combined with wisdom, in abstaining from the food sent to him from the king's table, as being polluted by the idolatries usual at heathen banquets (Dan 1:8-16). Hence Ezekiel's reference to him (Eze 14:14, Eze 14:20; Eze 28:3) is precisely of that kind we should expect; a coincidence which must be undesigned. Ezekiel refers to him not as a writer, but as exhibiting a character righteous and wise in discerning secrets, in those circumstances now found in his book, which are earlier than the time when Ezekiel wrote. As Joseph rose in Egypt by interpreting Pharaoh's dreams, so Daniel, by interpreting Nebuchadnezzar's, was promoted to be governor of Babylonia, and president of the Magian priest-caste. Under Evil-merodach, Nebuchadnezzar's successor, as a change of officers often attends the accession of a new king, Daniel seems to have had a lower post, which led him occasionally to be away from Babylon (Dan 8:2, Dan 8:27). Again he came into note when he read the mystic writing of Belshazzar's doom on the wall on the night of that monarch's impious feast. BEROSUS calls the last Babylonian king Nabonidus and says he was not killed, but had an honorable abode in Carmania assigned to him, after having surrendered voluntarily in Borsippa. RAWLINSON has cleared up the discrepancy from the Nineveh inscription. Belshazzar was joint king with his father, Evil-merodach or Nabonidus (called Minus in the inscriptions), to whom he was subordinate. He shut himself up in Babylon, while the other king took refuge elsewhere, namely, in Borsippa. BEROSUS gives the Chaldean account, which suppresses all about Belshazzar, as being to the national dishonor. Had Daniel been a late book, he would no doubt have taken up the later account of BEROSUS. If he gave a history differing from that current in Babylonia, the Jews of that region would not have received it as true. Darius the Mede, or Cyaxares II, succeeded and reigned two years. The mention of this monarch's reign, almost unknown to profane history (being eclipsed by the splendor of Cyrus) is an incidental proof that Daniel wrote as a contemporary historian of events which he knew, and did not borrow from others. In the third year of Cyrus he saw the visions (the tenth through twelfth chapters) relating to his people down to the latest days and the coming resurrection. He must have been about eighty-four years old at this time. Tradition represents Daniel as having died and been buried at Shushan. Though his advanced age did not allow him to be among those who returned to Palestine, yet he never ceased to have his people's interests nearest to his heart (Dan. 9:3-19; Dan 10:12).\n\nAUTHENTICITY OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL. Dan 7:1, Dan 7:28; Dan 8:2; Dan 9:2; Dan 10:1-2; Dan 12:4-5, testify that it was composed by Daniel himself. He does not mention himself in the first six chapters, which are historical; for in these it is not the author, but the events which are the prominent point. In the last six, which are prophetical, the author makes himself known, for here it was needed, prophecy being a revelation of words to particular men. It holds a third rank in the Hebrew canon: not among the prophets, but in the Hagiographa (Chetubim), between Esther and Ezra, books like it relating to the captivity; because he did not strictly belong to those who held exclusively the profession of \"prophets\" in the theocracy, but was rather a \"seer,\" having the gift, but not the office of prophet. Were the book an interpolated one, it doubtless would have been placed among the prophets. Its present position is a proof of its genuineness, as it was deliberately put in a position different from that where most would expect to find it. Placed between Esther, and Ezra and Nehemiah, it separated the historical books of the time after the captivity. Thus, Daniel was, as BENGEL calls him, the politician, chronologer, and historian among the prophets. The Psalms also, though many are prophetical, are ranked with the Hagiographa, not with the prophets; and the Revelation of John is separated from his Epistles, as Daniel is from the Old Testament prophets. Instead of writing in the midst of the covenant people, and making them the foreground of his picture, he writes in a heathen court, the world kingdoms occupying the foreground, and the kingdom of God, though ultimately made the most significant, the background. His peculiar position in the heathen court is reflected in his peculiar position in the canon. As the \"prophets\" in the Old Testament, so the epistles of the apostles in the New Testament were written by divinely commissioned persons for their contemporaries. But Daniel and John were not in immediate contact with the congregation, but isolated and alone with God, the one in a heathen court, the other on a lonely isle (Rev 1:9). PORPHYRY, the assailant of Christianity in the third century, asserted that the Book of Daniel was a forgery of the time of the Maccabees (170-164 B.C.), a time when confessedly there were no prophets, written after the events as to Antiochus Epiphanes, which it professes to foretell; so accurate are the details. A conclusive proof of Daniel's inspiration, if his prophecies can be shown to have been before the events. Now we know, from JOSEPHUS [Antiquities, 10.11.7], that the Jews in Christ's days recognized Daniel as in the canon. Zechariah, Ezra, and Nehemiah, centuries before Antiochus, refer to it. Jesus refers to it in His characteristic designation, \"Son of man,\" Mat 24:30 (Dan 7:13); also expressly by name, and as a \"prophet,\" in Mat 24:15 (compare Mat 24:21, with Dan 12:1, &c.); and in the moment that decided His life (Mat 26:64) or death, when the high priest adjured him by the living God. Also, in Luk 1:19-26, \"Gabriel\" is mentioned, whose name occurs nowhere else in Scripture, save in Dan 8:16; Dan 9:21. Besides the references to it in Revelation, Paul confirms the prophetical part of it, as to the blasphemous king (Dan 7:8, Dan 7:25; Dan 11:36), in Co1 6:2; Th2 2:3-4; the narrative part, as to the miraculous deliverances from \"the lions\" and \"the fire,\" in Heb 11:33-34. Thus the book is expressly attested by the New Testament on the three points made the stumbling-block of neologists--the predictions, the narratives of miracles, and the manifestations of angels. An objection has been stated to the unity of the book, namely, that Jesus quotes no part of the first half of Daniel. But Mat 21:44 would be an enigma if it were not a reference to the \"stone that smote the image\" (Dan 2:34-35, Dan 2:44-45). Thus the New Testament sanctions the second, third, sixth, seventh, and eleventh chapters. The design of the miracles in the heathen courts where Daniel was, as of those of Moses in Egypt, was to lead the world power, which seemed to be victorious over the theocracy, to see the essential inner superiority of the seemingly fallen kingdom of God to itself, and to show prostrate Israel that the power of God was the same as of old in Egypt. The first book of Maccabees (compare 1 Maccabees 1:24; 9:27, 40, with Dan 12:1; Dan 11:26, of the Septuagint) refers to Daniel as an accredited book, and even refers to the Septuagint Alexandrian version of it. The fact of Daniel having a place in the Septuagint shows it was received by the Jews at large prior to the Maccabean times. The Septuagint version so arbitrarily deviated from the Hebrew Daniel, that Theodotius' version was substituted for it in the early Christian Church. JOSEPHUS [Antiquities, 11.8.5] mentions that Alexander the Great had designed to punish the Jews for their fidelity to Darius, but that Jaddua (332 B.C.), the high priest, met him at the head of a procession and averted his wrath by showing him Daniel's prophecy that a Grecian monarch should overthrow Persia. Certain it is, Alexander favored the Jews, and JOSEPHUS' statement gives an explanation of the fact; at least it shows that the Jews in JOSEPHUS' days believed that Daniel was extant in Alexander's days, long before the Maccabees. With Jaddua (high priest from 341-322 B.C.) the Old Testament history ends (Neh 12:11). (The register of the priests and Levites was not written by Nehemiah, who died about 400 B.C., but was inserted with divine sanction by the collectors of the canon subsequently.) An objection to Daniel's authenticity has been rested on a few Greek words found in it. But these are mostly names of Greek musical instruments, which were imported by Greece from the East, rather than vice versa. Some of the words are derived from the common Indo-Germanic stock of both Greek and Chaldee: hence their appearance in both tongues. And one or two may have come through the Greeks of Asia Minor to the Chaldee. The fact that from the fourth verse of the second chapter to the end of the seventh, the language is Chaldee, but the rest Hebrew, is not an argument against, but for, its authenticity. So in Ezra the two languages are found. The work, if that of one author, must have been composed by someone in the circumstances of Daniel, that is, by one familiar with both languages. No native-born Hebrew who had not lived in Chaldea would know Chaldee so well as to use it with the same idiomatic ease as his native tongue; the very impurities in Daniel's use of both are just such as were natural to one in his circumstances, but unnatural to one in a later age, or to one not half Hebrew, half Chaldean in residence as Daniel was. Those parts of Daniel which concern the whole world are mostly Chaldee, then the language of the world empire. So Greek was made the language of the New Testament, which was designed for the whole world. Those affecting the Jews, mostly Hebrew; and this not so impure as that of Ezekiel. His Chaldee is a mixture of Hebrew and Aramaic. Two predictions alone are enough to prove to us that Daniel was a true prophet. (1) That his prophecies reach beyond Antiochus; namely, he foretells the rise of the four great monarchies, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome (the last not being in Daniel's time known beyond the precincts of Italy, or rather of Latium), and that no other earthly kingdom would subvert the fourth, but that it would divide into parts. All this has come to pass. No fifth great earthly monarchy has arisen, though often attempted, as by Charlemagne, Charles V, and Napoleon. (2) The time of Messiah's advent, as dated from a certain decree, His being cut off, and the destruction of the city. \"He who denies Daniel's prophecies,\" says SIR ISAAC NEWTON, \"undermines Christianity, which is founded on Daniel's prophecies concerning Christ.\"\n\nCHARACTERISTICS OF DANIEL. The vision mode of revelation is the exception in other prophets, the rule in Daniel. In Zechariah (Zec. 1:1-6:15), who lived after Daniel, the same mode appears, but the other form from the seventh chapter to the end. The Revelation of St. John alone is perfectly parallel to Daniel, which may be called the Old Testament Apocalypse. In the contents too there is the difference above noticed, that he views the kingdom of God from the standpoint of the world kingdoms, the development of which is his great subject. This mode of viewing it was appropriate to his own position in a heathen court, and to the relation of subjection in which the covenant-people then stood to the world powers. No longer are single powers of the world incidentally introduced, but the universal monarchies are the chief theme, in which the worldly principle, opposed to the kingdom of God, manifests itself fully. The near and distant are not seen in the same perspective, as by the other prophets, who viewed the whole future from the eschatological point; but in Daniel the historical details are given of that development of the world powers which must precede the advent of the kingdom [AUBERLEN].\n\nSIGNIFICANCE OF THE BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY. The exile is the historical basis of Daniel's prophecies, as Daniel implies in the first chapter, which commences with the beginning, and ends with the termination, of the captivity (Dan 1:1, Dan 1:21; compare Dan 9:1-2). A new stage in the theocracy begins with the captivity. Nebuchadnezzar made three incursions into Judah. The first under Jehoiakim (606 B.C.), in which Daniel was carried away, subjected the theocracy to the Babylonian world power. The second (598 B.C.) was that in which Jehoiachin and Ezekiel were carried away. In the third (588 B.C.), Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem and carried away Zedekiah. Originally, Abraham was raised out of the \"sea\" (Dan 7:2) of the nations, as an island holy to God, and his seed chosen as God's mediator of His revelations of love to mankind. Under David and Solomon, the theocracy, as opposed to the heathen power, attained its climax in the Old Testament, not only being independent, but lord of the surrounding nations; so that the period of these two kings was henceforth made the type of the Messianic. But when God's people, instead of resting on Him, seek alliance with the world power, that very power is made the instrument of their chastisement. So Ephraim (722 B.C.) fell by Assyria; and Judah also, drawn into the sphere of the world's movements from the time of Ahaz, who sought Assyrian help (740 B.C., Isa. 7:1-25) at last fell by Babylon, and thenceforth has been more or less dependent on the world monarchies, and so, till Messiah, was favored with no revelations from the time of Malachi (four hundred years). Thus, from the beginning of the exile, the theocracy, in the strict sense, ceased on earth; the rule of the world powers superseding it. But God's covenant with Israel remains firm (Rom 11:29); therefore, a period of blessing under Messiah's kingdom is now foretold as about to follow their long chastisement. The exile thus is the turning point in the history of the theocracy, which ROOS thus divides: (1) From Adam to the exodus out of Egypt. (2) From the exodus to the beginning of the Babylonian captivity. (3) From the captivity to the millennium. (4) From the millennium to the end of the world. The position of Daniel in the Babylonian court was in unison with the altered relations of the theocracy and the world power, which new relation was to be the theme of his prophecy. Earlier prophets, from the standpoint of Israel, treated of Israel in its relation to the world powers; Daniel, from Babylon, the center of the then world power, treats of the world powers in their relation to Israel. His seventy years' residence in Babylon, and his high official position there, gave him an insight into the world's politics, fitting him to be the recipient of political revelations; while his spiritual experiences, gained through Nebuchadnezzar's humiliation, Belshazzar's downfall, and the rapid decay of the Babylonian empire itself, as well as the miraculous deliverances of himself and his friends (the third through sixth chapters), all fitted him for regarding things from the spiritual standpoint, from which the world's power appears transient, but the glory of God's kingdom eternal. As his political position was the body, the school of magicians in which he had studied for three years (Dan 1:4-5) was the soul; and his mind strong in faith and nourished by the earlier prophecies (Dan 9:2), the spirit of his prophecy, which only waited for the spirit of revelation from above to kindle it. So God fits His organs for their work. AUBERLEN compares Daniel to Joseph: the one at the beginning, the other at the end of the Jewish history of revelation; both representatives of God and His people at heathen courts; both interpreters of the dim presentiments of truth, expressed in God-sent dreams, and therefore raised to honor by the powers of the world: so representing Israel's calling to be a royal priesthood among the nations; and types of Christ, the true Israel, and of Israel's destination to be a light to lighten the whole Gentile world, as Rom 11:12, Rom 11:15 foretells. As Achilles at the beginning, and Alexander at the end, of Grecian history are the mirrors of the whole life of the Hellenic people, so Joseph and Daniel of Israel.\n\nCONTENTS OF THE BOOK. Historical and biographical introduction in the first chapter. Daniel, a captive exile, is representative of his nation in its servitude and exile: while his heavenly insight into dreams, far exceeding that of the magi, represents the divine superiority of the covenant-people over their heathen lords. The high dignities, even in the world, which he thereby attained, typify the giving of the earth-kingdom at last \"to the people of the saints of the Most High\" (Dan 7:27). Thus Daniel's personal history is the typical foundation of his prophecy. The prophets had to experience in themselves, and in their age, something of what they foretold about future times; just as David felt much of Christ's sufferings in his own person (compare Hos 1:2-11; Hos 2:3). So Jon. 1:1-17, &c. [ROOS]. Hence biographical notices of Daniel and his friends are inserted among his prophecies. The second through twelfth chapters contain the substance of the book, and consist of two parts. The first (the second through seventh chapters) represents the development of the world powers, viewed from a historical point. The second (the eighth through twelfth chapters), their development in relation to Israel, especially in the future preceding Christ's first advent, foretold in the ninth chapter. But prophecy looks beyond the immediate future to the complete fulfilment in the last days, since the individual parts in the organic history of salvation cannot be understood except in connection with the whole. Also Israel looked forward to the Messianic time, not only for spiritual salvation, but also for the visible restoration of the kingdom which even now we too expect. The prophecy which they needed ought therefore to comprise both, and so much of the history of the world as would elapse before the final consummation. The period of Daniel's prophecies, therefore, is that from the downfall of the theocracy at the captivity till its final restoration, yet future--the period of the dominion of the world powers, not set aside by Christ's first coming (Joh 18:36; for, to have taken the earth-kingdom then, would have been to take it from Satan's hands, Mat 4:8-10), but to be superseded by His universal and everlasting kingdom at His second coming (Rev 11:15). Thus the general survey of the development and final destiny of the world powers (the second through seventh chapters) fittingly precedes the disclosures as to the immediate future (the eighth through twelfth chapters). Daniel marks the division by writing the first part in Chaldee, and the second, and the introduction, in Hebrew; the former, referring to the powers of the world, in the language of the then dominant world power under which he lived; the latter, relating to the people of God, in their own language. An interpolator in a later age would have used Hebrew, the language of the ancient prophets throughout, or if anywhere Aramaic, so as to be understood by his contemporaries, he would have used it in the second rather than in the first part as having a more immediate reference to his own times [AUBERLEN]. \n\n\n\nNext: Daniel Chapter 1\n\n","order":27,"numberOfChapters":12,"sha256":"52ffb04ed7fdad0a18e31cb0dd5f7354207dcc9f1eb26ff0a5baf325867e27a4","firstChapterNumber":1,"firstChapterApiLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/DAN/1.json","firstChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","book":"DAN","chapter":1},"lastChapterNumber":12,"lastChapterApiLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/DAN/12.json","lastChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","book":"DAN","chapter":12},"totalNumberOfVerses":305},"chapter":{"number":8,"content":[{"type":"verse","number":2,"content":["Shushan--Susa. Though then comparatively insignificant, it was destined to be the capital of Persia after Cyrus' time. Therefore Daniel is transported into it, as being the capital of the kingdom signified by the two-horned ram (Neh 1:1; Est 1:2-5). \n\nElam--west of Persia proper, east of Babylonia, south of Media. Daniel was not present there personally, but in vision. \n\nUlai--called in PLINY Euloeus; by the Greeks, Choaspes. Now Kerah, or Karasu. So in Dan 10:4 he receives a vision near another river, the Hiddekel. So Ezekiel (Eze 1:1) at the Chebar. Perhaps because synagogues used to be built near rivers, as before praying they washed their hands in the water [ROSENMULLER], (Psa 137:1).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":3,"content":["two horns--The \"two\" ought not to be in italics, as if it were not in the original; for it is expressed by the Hebrew dual. \"Horn\" in the East is the symbol of power and royalty. \n\none . . . higher than . . . other . . . the higher came up last--Persia, which was of little note till Cyrus' time, became then ascendant over Media, the more ancient kingdom. Darius was sixty-two years old (Dan 5:31) when he began to reign; during his short reign of two years, being a weak king (Dan 6:1-3), the government was almost entirely in Cyrus' hands. Hence HERODOTUS does not mention Darius; but XENOPHON does under the name of Cyaxares II. The \"ram\" here corresponds to the \"bear\" (Dan 7:5), symbolizing clumsy firmness. The king of Persia wore a jewelled ram's head of gold instead of a diadem, such as are seen on the pillars at Persepolis. Also the Hebrew for \"ram\" springs from the same root as \"Elam,\" or Persia [NEWTON]. The \"one horn higher than the other\" answers to the bear \"raising itself on one side\" (compare Note, see on Dan 7:5).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":4,"content":["ram pushing westward--Persia conquered westward Babylon, Mesopotamia, Syria, Asia Minor. \n\nnorthward--Colchis, Armenia, Iberia, and the dwellers on the Caspian Sea. \n\nsouthward--Judea, Egypt, Ethiopia, Libya; also India, under Darius. He does not say eastward, for the Persians themselves came from the east (Isa 46:11). \n\ndid according to his will-- (Dan 11:3, Dan 11:16; compare Dan 5:19).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":5,"content":["he-goat--GrÃ&brvbrco-Macedonia. \n\nnotable horn--Alexander. \"Touched not . . . ground,\" implies the incredible swiftness of his conquests; he overran the world in less than twelve years. The he-goat answers to the leopard (Dan 7:6). Caranus, the first king of Macedonia, was said to have been led by goats to Edessa, which he made the seat of his kingdom, and called Æge, that is, \"goat-city.\"\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":6,"content":["standing before the river--Ulai. It was at the \"river\" Granicus that Alexander fought his first victorious battle against Darius, 334 B.C.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":7,"content":["moved with choler--Alexander represented the concentrated wrath of Greece against Persia for the Persian invasions of Greece; also for the Persian cruelties to Greeks, and Darius' attempts to seduce Alexander's soldiers to treachery [NEWTON]. \n\nstamped upon him--In 331 B.C. he defeated Darius Codomanus, and in 330 burned Persepolis and completed the conquest of Persia. \n\nnone . . . could deliver--Not the immense hosts of Persia could save it from the small army of Alexander (Psa 33:16).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":8,"content":["when he was strong . . . great horn was broken--The empire was in full strength at Alexander's death by fever at Babylon, and seemed then least likely to fall. Yet it was then \"broken.\" His natural brother, Philip Aridoeus, and his two sons, Alexander Ægus and Hercules, in fifteen months were murdered. \n\nfour . . . toward . . . four winds--Seleucus, in the east, obtained Syria, Babylonia, Media, &c.; Cassander, in the west, Macedon Thessaly, Greece; PTOLEMY, in the south, Egypt, Cyprus, &c.; Lysimachus, in the north, Thrace, Cappadocia, and the north parts of Asia Minor.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":9,"content":["little horn--not to be confounded with the little horn of the fourth kingdom in Dan 7:8. The little horn in Dan 7:8 comes as an eleventh horn after ten preceding horns. In Dan 8:9 it is not an independent fifth horn, after the four previous ones, but it arises out of one of the four existing horns. This horn is explained (Dan 8:23) to be \"a king of fierce countenance,\" &c. Antiochus Epiphanes is meant. Greece with all its refinement produces the first, that is, the Old Testament Antichrist. Antiochus had an extraordinarly love of art, which expressed itself in grand temples. He wished to substitute Zeus Olympius for Jehovah at Jerusalem. Thus first heathen civilization from below, and revealed religion from above, came into collision. Identifying himself with Jupiter, his aim was to make his own worship universal (compare Dan 8:25 with Dan 11:36); so mad was he in this that he was called Epimanes (maniac) instead of Epiphanes. None of the previous world rulers, Nebuchadnezzar (Dan 4:31-34), Darius (Dan 6:27-28), Cyrus (Ezr 1:2-4), Artaxerxes Longimanus (Ezr 7:12), had systematically opposed the Jews' religious worship. Hence the need of prophecy to prepare them for Antiochus. The struggle of the Maccabees was a fruit of Daniel's prophecy (1 Maccabees 2:59). He is the forerunner of the final Antichrist, standing in the same relation to the first advent of Christ that Antichrist does to His second coming. The sins in Israel which gave rise to the Greek Antichrist were that some Jews adopted Hellenic customs (compare Dan 11:30, Dan 11:32), erecting theaters, and regarding all religions alike, sacrificing to Jehovah, but at the same time sending money for sacrifices to Hercules. Such shall be the state of the world when ripe for Antichrist. At Dan 8:9 and Dan 8:23 the description passes from the literal Antiochus to features which, though partially attributed to him, hold good in their fullest sense only of his antitype, the New Testament Antichrist. The Mohammedan Antichrist may also be included; answering to the Euphratean (Turk) horsemen (Rev 9:14-21), loosed \"an hour, a day, a month, a year\" (391 years, in the year-day theory), to scourge corrupted, idolatrous Christianity. In A.D. 637 the Saracen Moslem mosque of Omar was founded on the site of the temple, \"treading under foot the sanctuary\" (Dan 8:11-13); and there it still remains.The first conquest of the Turks over Christians was in A.D. 1281; and 391 years after they reached their zenith of power and began to decline, Sobieski defeating them at Vienna. Mohammed II, called \"the conqueror,\" reigned A.D. 1451-1481, in which period Constantinople fell 391 years after brings us to our own day, in which Turkey's fall is imminent. \n\nwaxed . . . great, toward . . . south-- (Dan 11:25). Antiochus fought against PTOLEMY Philometer and Egypt, that is, the south. \n\ntoward the east--He fought against those who attempted a change of government in Persia. \n\ntoward the pleasant land--Judea, \"the glorious land\" (Dan 11:16, Dan 11:41, Dan 11:45; compare Psa 48:2; Eze 20:6, Eze 20:15). Its chief pleasantness consists in its being God's chosen land (Psa 132:13; Jer 3:19). Into it Antiochus made his inroad after his return from Egypt.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":10,"content":["great, even to . . . host of heaven--explained in Dan 8:24, \"the mighty and holy people,\" that is, the Jews (Dan 7:21) and their priests (compare Isa 24:21). The Levites' service is called \"a warfare\" (Num 8:24-25, Margin). Great civil and religious powers are symbolized by \"stars\" (Mat 24:29). See 1 Maccabees 1:25, &c.; 1 Maccabees 2:35, &c.; 1 Maccabees 5:2, 12, 13. TREGELLES refers \"stars\" to those Jews whose portion from God is heavenly glory (Dan 12:3), being believers in Him who is above at God's right hand: not the blinded Jews. \n\ncast . . . stars to the ground--So Babel, as type of Antichrist, is described (Isa 14:13-14), \"I will exalt my throne above the stars of God.\" Compare Rev 12:4; 2 Maccabees 9:10, as to Antiochus.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":11,"content":["to the prince of the host--that is, God Himself, the Lord of Sabaoth, the hosts in heaven and earth, stars, angels, and earthly ministers. So Dan 8:25, \"he shall stand up against the Prince of princes\"; \"against the God of gods\" (Dan 11:36; compare Dan 7:8). He not only opposes God's ancient people, but also God Himself. \n\ndaily sacrifice--offered morning and evening (Exo 29:38-39). \n\ntaken away--by Antiochus (1 Maccabees 1:20-50). \n\nsanctuary . . . cast down--Though robbed of its treasures, it was not strictly cast down\" by Antiochus. So that a fuller accomplishment is future. Antiochus took away the daily sacrifice for a few years; the Romans, for many ages, and \"cast down\" the temple; and Antichrist, in connection with Rome, the fourth kingdom, shall do so again after the Jews in their own land, still unbelieving, shall have rebuilt the temple, and restored the Mosaic ritual: God giving them up to him \"by reason of transgression\" (Dan 8:12), that is, not owning the worship so rendered [TREGELLES]; and then the opposition of the horn to the \"truth\" is especially mentioned.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":12,"content":["an host--rather, \"the host was given up to him,\" that is, the holy people were given into his hands. So in Dan 8:10 \"the host\" is used; and again in Dan 8:13, where also \"give\" is used as here for \"giving up\" for destruction (compare Dan 11:6) [MAURER]. \n\nagainst . . . daily sacrifice--rather (the host was given up for him to tread upon), \"together with the daily sacrifice\" (compare Dan 8:13). \n\nby reason of transgression--1 Maccabees 1:11-16 traces all the calamities suffered under Antiochus to the transgression of certain Jews who introduced heathen customs into Jerusalem just before. But transgression was not at the full (Dan 8:23) under Antiochus; for Onias the high priest administered the laws in godliness at the time (2 Maccabees 3:1). Therefore the \"transgression\" must refer to that of the Jews hereafter restored to Palestine in unbelief. \n\nthe truth--the worship of the true God. Isa 59:14, \"Truth is fallen in the street.\" \n\npractised, and prospered--Whatever he undertook succeeded (Dan 8:4; Dan 11:28, Dan 11:36).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":13,"content":["that certain saint--Daniel did not know the names of these two holy angels, but saw only that one was speaking to the other. \n\nHow long shall be the vision concerning . . . daily sacrifice--How long shall the daily sacrifice be suspended? \n\ntransgression of desolation--literally, \"making desolate,\" that is, Antiochus desolating profanation of the temple (Dan 11:31; Dan 12:11). Compare as to Rome and the last Antichrist, Mat 24:15.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":14,"content":["unto me--The answer is to Daniel, not to the inquirer, for the latter had asked in Daniel's name; as vice versa the saint or angel (Job 15:15; Psa 89:6-7) speaks of the vision granted to Daniel, as if it had been granted to himself. For holy men are in Scripture represented as having attendant angels, with whom they are in a way identified in interests. If the conversation had been limited to the angels, it could have been of no use to us. But God conveys it to prophetical men, for our good, through the ministry of angels. \n\ntwo thousand . . . three hundred days--literally, \"mornings and evenings,\" specified in connection with the morning and evening sacrifice. Compare Gen 1:5. Six years and a hundred ten days. This includes not only the three and a half years during which the daily sacrifice was forbidden by Antiochus [JOSEPHUS, Wars of the Jews, 1:1.1], but the whole series of events whereby it was practically interrupted: beginning with the \"little horn waxing great toward the pleasant land,\" and \"casting down some of the host\" (Dan 8:9-10); namely, when in 171 B.C., or the month Sivan in the year 142 of the era of the SeleucidÃ&brvbr, the sacrifices began to be neglected, owing to the high priest Jason introducing at Jerusalem Grecian customs and amusements, the palÃ&brvbrstra and gymnasium; ending with the death of Antiochus, 165 B.C., or the month Shebath, in the year 148 of the Seleucid era. Compare 1 Maccabees 1:11-15; 2 Maccabees 4:9, &c. The reason for the greater minuteness of historical facts and dates, given in Daniel's prophecies, than in those of the New Testament, is that Israel, not having yet the clear views which Christians have of immortality and the heavenly inheritance, could only be directed to the earthly future: for it was on earth the looked-for Messiah was to appear, and the sum and subject of Old Testament prophecy was the kingdom of God upon earth. The minuteness of the revelation of Israel's earthly destiny was to compensate for the absence, in the Old Testament, of views of heavenly glory. Thus, in Dan 9:24-27, the times of Messiah are foretold to the very year; in Dan 8:14 the times of Antiochus, even to the day; and in Dan. 11:5-20 the Syro-Egyptian struggles in most minute detail. TREGELLES thinks the twenty-three hundred \"days\" answer to the week of years (Dan 9:27), during which the destroying prince (Dan 9:26) makes a covenant, which he breaks in the midst of the week (namely, at the end of three and a half years). The seven years exceed the twenty-three hundred days by considerably more than a half year. This period of the seven years' excess above the twenty-three hundred days may be allotted to the preparations needed for setting up the temple-worship, with Antichrist's permission to the restored Jews, according to his \"covenant\" with them; and the twenty-three hundred days may date from the actual setting up of the worship. But, says AUBERLEN, the more accurate to a day the dates as to Antiochus are given, the less should we say the 1290, or 1335 days (Dan 12:11-12) correspond to the half week (roughly), and the twenty-three hundred to the whole. The event, however, may, in the case of Antichrist, show a correspondence between the days here given and Dan 9:27, such as is not yet discernible. The term of twenty-three hundred days cannot refer twenty-three hundred years of the treading down of Christianity by Mohammedanism, as this would leave the greater portion of the time yet future; whereas, Mohammedanism is fast waning. If the twenty-three hundred days mean years, dating from Alexander's conquests, 334 B.C. to 323, we should arrive at about the close of the sixth thousand years of the world, just as the 1260 years (Dan 7:25) from Justinian's decree arrive at the same terminus. The Jews' tradition represents the seventh thousand as the millennium. CUMMING remarks, 480 B.C. is the date of the waning of the Persian empire before Greece; deducting 480 from 2300, we have 1820; and in 1821, Turkey, the successor of the Greek empire, began to wane, and Greece became a separate kingdom. See on Dan 12:11. \n\ncleansed--literally, \"justified,\" vindicated from profanation. Judas Maccabeus celebrated the feast of dedication after the cleansing, on the twenty-fifth of the ninth month, Kisleu (1 Maccabees 4:51-58; 2 Maccabees 10:1-7; Joh 10:22). As to the antitypical dedication of the new temple, see Eze. 43:1-27, &c.; also Amo 9:11-12.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":16,"content":["Gabriel--meaning, \"the strength of God.\"\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":17,"content":["the time of the end--so Dan 8:19; Dan 11:35-36, Dan 11:40. The event being to take place at \"the time of the end\" makes it likely that the Antichrist ultimately referred to (besides the immediate reference to Antiochus) in this chapter, and the one in Dan 7:8, are one and the same. The objection that the one in the seventh chapter springs out of the ten divisions of the Roman earth, the fourth kingdom, the one in the eighth chapter and the eleventh chapter from one of the four divisions of the third kingdom, Greece, is answered thus: The four divisions of the Grecian empire, having become parts of the Roman empire, shall at the end form four of its ten final divisions [TREGELLES]. However, the origin from one of the four parts of the third kingdom may be limited to Antiochus, the immediate subject of the eighth and eleventh chapter, while the ulterior typical reference of these chapters (namely, Antichrist) may belong to one of the ten Roman divisions, not necessarily one formerly of the four of the third kingdom. The event will tell. \"Time of the end\" may apply to the time of Antiochus. For it is the prophetic phrase for the time of fulfilment, seen always at the end of the prophetic horizon (Gen 49:1; Num 24:14).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":19,"content":["the last end of the indignation--God's displeasure against the Jews for their sins. For their comfort they are told, the calamities about to come are not to be for ever. The \"time\" is limited (Dan 9:27; Dan 11:27, Dan 11:35-36; Dan 12:7; Hab 2:3).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":21,"content":["the first king--Philip was king of Macedon before Alexander, but the latter was the first who, as a generalissimo of Greece, subdued the Persian empire.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":22,"content":["not in his power--not with the power which Alexander possessed [MAURER]. An empire united, as under Alexander, is more powerful than one divided, as under the four Diadochi.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":23,"content":["transgressors are come to the full--This does not hold good of the times of Antiochus, but of the closing times of the Christian era. Compare Luk 18:8, and Ti2 3:1-9, as to the wickedness of the world in general just before Christ's second coming. Israel's guilt, too, shall then be at the full, when they who rejected Christ shall receive Antichrist; fulfilling Jesus words, \"I am come in My Father's name, and ye receive Me not; if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive\" (compare Gen 15:16; Mat 23:32; Th1 2:16). \n\nof fierce countenance-- (Deu 28:50); one who will spare neither old nor young. \n\nunderstanding dark sentences--rather, \"artifices\" [GESENIUS]. Antiochus made himself master of Egypt and Jerusalem successively by craft (1 Maccabees 1:30, &c.; 2 Maccabees 5:24, &c.).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":24,"content":["not by his own power--which in the beginning was \"little\" (Dan 8:9; Dan 7:8); but by gaining over others through craft, the once little horn became \"mighty\" (compare Dan 8:25; Dan 11:23). To be fully realized by Antichrist. He shall act by the power of Satan, who shall then be permitted to work through him in unrestricted license, such as he has not now (Rev 13:2); hence the ten kingdoms shall give the beast their power (Th2 2:9-12; Rev 17:13). \n\nprosper and practise--prosper in all that he attempts (Dan 8:12). \n\nholy people--His persecutions are especially directed against the Jews.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":25,"content":["by peace--by pretending \"peace\" and friendship; in the midst of security [GESENIUS], suddenly striking his blow (compare Note, see on Jer 15:8). \"A spoiler at noon-day.\" \n\nalso . . . against the Prince of princes--not merely against the Jews (Dan 8:11; Dan 11:36). \n\nbroken without hand--by God's special visitation. The stone \"cut out of the mountain without hands,\" that is, Christ is to smite the world power image on his feet (Dan 2:34), that is, in its last development (compare Dan 7:11). Antiochus horrible death by worms and ulcers, when on his way to Judea, intending to take vengeance for the defeat of his armies by the Maccabees, was a primary fulfilment, foreshadowing God's judgment on the last enemy of the Jewish Church.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":26,"content":["shut . . . up . . . vision--implying the vision was not to be understood for the present. In Rev 22:10 it is said, \"Seal not the vision, for the time is at hand.\" What in Daniel's time was hidden was more fully explained in Revelation, and as the time draws nearer, it will be clearer still. \n\nit shall be for many days--It refers to remote times (Eze 12:27).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":27,"content":["I . . . was sick--through grief at the calamities coming on my people and the Church of God (compare Psa 102:14). \n\nafterward I . . . did the king's business--He who holds nearest communion with heaven can best discharge the duties of common life. \n\nnone understood it--He had heard of kings, but knew not their names; He foresaw the events, but not the time when they were to take place; thereupon he could only feel \"astonished,\" and leave all with the omniscient God [JEROME].\n\nThe world powers here recede from view; Israel, and the salvation by Messiah promised to it, are the subject of revelation. Israel had naturally expected salvation at the end of the captivity. Daniel is therefore told, that, after the seventy years of the captivity, seventy times seven must elapse, and that even then Messiah would not come in glory as the Jews might through misunderstanding expect from the earlier prophets, but by dying would put away sin. This ninth chapter (Messianic prophecy) stands between the two visions of the Old Testament Antichrist, to comfort \"the wise.\" In the interval between Antiochus and Christ, no further revelation was needed; therefore, as in the first part of the book, so in the second, Christ and Antichrist in connection are the theme.\n\n\n\n\nNext: Daniel Chapter 9\n\n"]}],"introduction":"VISION OF THE RAM AND HE-GOAT: THE TWENTY-THREE HUNDRED DAYS OF THE SANCTUARY BEING TRODDEN DOWN. (Dan. 8:1-27)\n\nvision--a higher kind of revelation than a dream. \n\nafter that . . . at the first--that in Dan 7:1.\n\n"},"thisChapterLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/DAN/8.json","thisChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","book":"DAN","chapter":8},"nextChapterApiLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/DAN/9.json","nextChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","book":"DAN","chapter":9},"previousChapterApiLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/DAN/7.json","previousChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","book":"DAN","chapter":7},"numberOfVerses":23}