« PreviousContinue »
burned in a flaming fire, as he could Here was an opportunity to make support two millions of people, al- his knowledge' known, such as had most half a century, wandering been rarely seen on earth. The about in a desert of sand, with wise men of the East were all ascountless flocks and herds. There sembled. The college of Chaldean is no more intrinsic difficulty in professors, the Royal Institute of stopping the mouth of a lion, than Babylon, was in full session. Asin making a dry road through a sea. trology had a chance to vindicate its It would require no more power, celestial origin. But it was utterly so far as we can see, to deprive a foiled. A poor Jewish boy, belong. king of his reason, than another ing to the captivity,' untied a knot king, like the presumptuous Herod, which baffled the collected wisdom of his life. A blaspheming despot of an empire ; but not by his own may be changed into a maniac as skill. Most emphatically, he ascriwell as into a corpse.
In other bed it to the God of the Hebrews, words, if we give up the miracles who alone understands the mysteof Daniel as incredible stories, we ries of the future. Now, could this must cast out at least one half of have been without its effect on the the miracles recorded in the Bible. exiled Jews ? No. • Confounded The improbability of the former be. be all they who serve graven iming true is no greater than that ages,' was shown to be a reality, as which attaches to the latter. The well as an anathema. . The folly of only question is, Does there appear their old idolatrous habits was now to be adequate reason for the inter proclaimed on the house-tops, in vention of Almighty power? Are the great metropolis of paganism. the miracles in Daniel a mere arbi. Could they return to that senseless trary play, as it were, of superhu- worship which had failed its devoman might, or were they designed tees in the hour of their utmost to teach valuable moral lessons ? need ? Again, the mercy of God The latter most decidedly. The was not wholly confined to the Jews. church of God was in Babylon. It Before the Redeemer's advent, he was embodied, in a sense, in Daniel had thoughts of kindness towards and his companions. It was in im- the Gentiles. We observe various minent danger of extinction in the preintimations, foreshadowings, as it fiery furnace and in the lion's den. were, of this. A single ray of true If the Guardian of the church was light, now and then, shot athwart ever called upon, we say it with the gloom. In Babylon, God did reverence, to come forth from the not leave himself without witness. hiding of his power,' and vindicate Once and again, he extorted from his calumniated servants, it was on the hoary polytheist the confession, the plain of Dura.' Besides, the that Jehovah only is God, and that Babylonish exile was manifestly de- every human being in his wide signed to cure the people of God realm, ought to serve and worship of their tendency to idolatry. And him alone. This acknowledgment it did this most effectually. After was not confined to the walls of the return, we hear no more of poly. the capital. The courier bore it theism. The propensity to run af- throughout the hundred and seven ter false gods had been extirpated. and twenty provinces. Did not these But how? In part, we reply, by things justify the Divine interposithe miracles which they saw tion? Did not the most benign reheard of in Babylon. In the in. sults follow? If a miracle be interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's tended and fitted to teach some great dreams, the omniscience of Jeho religious lessons, then we may not vah was brought to a public trial. reject the prophecies of Daniel.
They stand, in this respect, on the Herodotus. If what these writers same ground precisely as the rais- advance is apparently contradictory ing of Lazarus.
to his statements, then we affirm, Secondly, Daniel, considered as either that he is not correctly interan uninspired historian, is entitled preted, or they are mistaken. to more credit, than cotemporary We are now prepared to show, or subsequent profane writers, who briefly, that the book of Daniel was did not live in Babylon. This most written at the time it purports to reasonable rule has been reversed have been, that is, by Daniel in by the neological commentators. Babylon, during the exile of his The prophet has been put last on countrymen. the catalogue of authentic writers 1. The supposition of most, if not on the Babylonian history. If the all, of the neological writers, is, that facts, which he records, correspond it was written by some learned and with those narrated by profane au. pious Jew in the time of the Macthors, then his testimony is to be cabees, who wished to console his believed. But if Diodorus Siculus, countrymen under the pressure of or Xenophon, communicate any the heavy calamities that they were thing which conflicts with the bib- called to endure. In order to give lical account, then the Jewish histo- more weight to his words, he asrian is in fault. Any scribbler, who sumed the name of the venerable bears a Greek or Roman name, Hebrew exile ; and, under the sancthough he might live a thousand tion of the old prophet's authority, miles from Babylon, is confronted the book was at length received into with one who wrote on the spot, the sacred canon. In other words, who spoke the language of the peo- it was a pious fraud. The writer ple, and who was familiar, from his knew that he was putting down hisyouth, with the minute details of torical facts which had just transthose affairs which he professes to pired, yet he palmed them oft upon record. Why should he not be his countrymen as predictions, which taken as the standard authority, and had been uttered several hundred the testimony of other historians be years before. If it be so, the book received in proportion as it tallies ought, of course, to be struck from with his ? Should we listen, for a the canon. It has no more right to moment, to a proposal to award less be there, than the fable of Bel and authority to Thucydides in matters the Dragon, and not half so much pertaining to Athenian history, than claim as the first book of the Macto Josephus, Berosus, or Livy? The cabees. If the book of Daniel be whole literary world would cry out a product of the Maccabean pe. against the injustice of such a pro- riod, then it could have been introceeding. Yet similar injustice has duced into the canon only through been committed, in numberless in the collusion, or trickery, of the stances, by professedly Christian learned men among the Jews. But critics and interpreters. If Daniel's has this supposition even an air chronology will not conform to that of plausibility ? Could the Jewish of Abydenus, then the former is learned men allow a forgery to be pronounced to be in error, and an- foisted in among their sacred books, other proof is supposed to be fur. at a time when an almost superstinished against the authenticity of the tious reverence was paid to these book. To such a mode of proceed- books, when the spirit of true reliing, we can not defer. On the con- gion was remarkably revived among trary, we assume that Daniel had a the people, and when, also, they more accurate knowledge of Chal- had numerous and bitter enemies dean affairs than even Xenophon or among themselves, who were adhe
rents of their Syrian oppressors, and coming for the deliverance of his who were ready to seize upon every afflicted people; and so is he reppretext to vilify the patriotic Jews. resented in Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and Was it possible, in these circum- elsewhere. In Dan. 7: 13, 14, it is stances, to introduce a history under said, “I saw in the visions of night, the form of a prophecy, into the sa. and lo! in the clouds of heaven one cred code, and a history, too, which came like the Son of Man, and to portrays Antiochus Epiphanes in the Ancient of Days he went up, such an unfavorable light? The and stood before him, and to him abettors of the Syrian king would [the Messiah] was given power, certainly have seized upon such a honor and a kingdom, and that all fraud, to set forth the moral honesty people, nations and tongues should of their believing countrymen ;
and serve him; his dominion is an ever. pagan Porphyries would not have lasting dominion which shall not been wanting to trumpet the decep- pass away, and his kingdom shall tion to the world.
not be destroyed." In Isa. 9 : 7, 2. The principal doctrinal con- speaking of the Messiah, the prophet tents of Daniel are in accordance says, " Or the increase of his govwith what is found in other canon- ernment and of his peace there shall ical writings, particularly the later be no end, on the throne of David books, while they are not in such and in his kingdom, to establish it accordance with the apocryphal and order it from henceforth and Scriptures.
forever.” Ezek. 34: 23, 24, “ And There is no development of the I will appoint over them one ShepMessianic doctrine in the entire herd, who shall feed them, my serapocryphal literature. It knows vant David, who shall feed them, nothing of a personal Messiah. The and be their Shepherd, and I Jehopassage of 1 Maccabees 14: 41, vah will be their God and my ser" And that the Jews and the priests vant David shall be their Prince.” had determined that Simon should In like manner, many passages be their leader and high-priest, till might be adduced, which indicate a an expected prophet should appear," close resemblance between the deis not an exception to this remark. lineations of the Messiah by Daniel The author of the book of Baruch and those of the earlier prophets. was acquainted with the writings of The same remarks are applicable the old prophets, yet he has, in part, to the language employed by Daniel given up the Messianic predictions, and the other prophets in relation and in part, perverted them. Yet to the resurrection of the dead. We here, if any where, the hopes, which say the language employed, for we were clustering round a coming, do not now refer to the ideas which mighty Deliverer, should have been it expresses. In this respect, the clearly exhibited, for it is one main book of Daniel is essentially differobject of the author of the book to ent from the apocrypha. His rep. encourage the disheartened Jews by resentations accord with those of reciting promises from their sacred Isaiah and Hosea. They are not writings. The octrine of a com- derived from the doctrines of the ing Messiah, therefore, instead of fire-worshipers of Persia, but they being unfolded by the Maccabean are the native product of the He. writers, was actually obscured.* On brew soil. Let us quote one or two the contrary, in Daniel the Messiah passages. Dan. xii, 2 : “And many appears as a personal, Divine being, of those who sleep in the dust of
the earth shall awake, some to ever. See Tholuck's Literarischer Anzeiger, lasting life, and some to shame and August, 1842.
everlasting contempt.” Hos. xiii, 14: “From the hand of Sheol I written partly in German and partly will free them, from death I will in Latin, is proof that the professed ransom them. I will be thy de- author is not the real author. Danstruction, O death, I will be thy cut- iel was, undoubtedly, equally fa
, ting off, O Sheol.” Is. xxvi, 19: miliar with both dialects. Some“ Thy dead shall live, thy corpses
times he found it convenient to use shall arise. Awake and sing, ye the one, sometimes the other. The that dwell in the dust, for the dew Chaldee commences with the words of plants is thy dew, and the earth of the magicians, who, doubtless, shall cast forth her dead.” The used that language only; and much idea in Daniel is more fully devel- of the remaining Chaldee portion of oped than in the other prophets, but the book is a report of the words of it is evidently kindred.
the Chaldeans themselves. If the Zengerke has endeavored to book is the forgery of a writer in prove, that the doctrine respecting the time of the Maccabees, would angels in the book of Daniel, (an- the device of employing two langelology,) has a more intimate con. guages, if he were able to do so, nection with the later notions of the ever have occurred to him ? The Jews on the subject, than with the supposition appears to us exceedteaching of the canonical books. ingly improbable. The book, as Hengstenberg and others, however, now composed, bears on its face the have shown, that there is no ground marks of honesty, not of artifice. for this conclusion. The seraphim The authenticity of Ezra is not dein Isa. vi, 2, (princes or nobles of nied because he wrote in Hebrew heaven, Gesenius,) and the captain and Chaldee. Why should Daniel of the Lord's host, Josh. v, 14, are be questioned ? considered, by the writer last named, Again, in Ezekiel xiv, 14, Daniel as indicating ranks or orders in the is mentioned, along with Noah and hosts of angels. That the idea Job, as renowned for piety, and in should be more fully developed by xxviii, 3, for wisdom. Why should Daniel than it is by Isaiah, or by a mere youth, a contemporary of one of the early historical writers, Ezekiel, and but a few years older, is no more strange than that Mala- be entitled to such distinguished chi should more clearly point to honor ? By making Daniel one some circumstances in the coming member of this venerable triumvi. of our Lord than is done by Hosea rate, it has been argued, that Ezeor Moses. The light increases as kiel must have had in mind some the luminary approaches the hori. eminent individual of the
name, who lived long before, and 3. There is important circumstan- that the Maccabean writer assumes tial evidence of the authenticity of his name, and represents him as the book. The first chapter, the living in Babylon in the time of the first two verses and a part of the exile. Yet, the coupling of the third verse of the second chapter, name of the Daniel of the cap: and the last five chapters, are writ- tivity” with the names of Noah and ten in Hebrew; the remainder is in Job, by Ezekiel, appears to us to be Chaldee. The Chaldee is like that altogether natural. It is true, he in Ezra, and is much nearer the was a young man, but he was old Hebrew than the Chaldee which is in wisdom. He had shown himself found in the Targums. The fact superior to the wisest men of one that the book is written in two lan- of the highly cultivated nations in guages is not any more an argument the world. He had been publicly against its authenticity, than the fact honored by the most powerful mon. that the books now lying before us, arch of the age, and by him too
who had laid waste the native land narrative that there shall be a perof the young Hebrew, and who fect correspondence. In all trustwould, of course, have little pre worthy historians there may be inpossession in his favor. Of course stances of this apparent noble neg. the fame of the learned Hebrew ligence. Besides, what may have would be speedily diffused far and been perfectly reconcilable at the wide. The high distinction which period when a book was written, is he had reached, would be peculiarly now, in the lapse of time, necessagratifying to his afflicted country. rily involved in some difficulty. In men on the “ banks of the Chebar.” the present case, however, there In his advancement, they felt a pa- seems to be no insuperable obstacle triotic pride, and they might see in to a solution. We may suppose it a sign of their own • enlargement,' that Nebuchadnezzar came to JeruHis youth, instead of being a reason salem and besieged it in the third for silence, would only increase his year of Jehoiakim, according to celebrity. Hugo Grotius astonished Dan. i, 1, and 2 Chron. xxxvi, 6. Europe by preparing a valuable At this time, however, he had not edition of a Latin author before he actually ascended the throne, but was fifteen years old. Francis Ba- was placed at the head of the army con had not completed his sixteenth by his father Nabopolassar. He year when he wrote against the was named king by anticipation, Aristotelian philosophy. Before he just as we should now speak of king was twenty years old, he had gain George the Fourth, when he was ed an European reputation by the simply prince regent. Daniel, then, maturity and comprehensiveness of was carried to Babylon in the third his views. Daniel was the wise year of Jehoiakim, and in the last Bacon among the hoary hierophants of Nabopolassar. Thus a year or of Nebuchadnezzar's court. We
more elapsed before Nebuchadnezconclude, therefore, that the men- zar actually ascended the throne, tion of his name by Ezekiel is a while Daniel and his companions confirmation of his own history. were in their initiatory course. This
There are other incidental cir. would allow sufficient time for the cumstances which are not unimpor- three years' preparation, before tant. There is an apparent negli- Daniel was called to interpret the gence in regard to some points in dream in the second year of Nebuchronology. For example, there is chadnezzar—the latter part of the an apparent contradiction between year, as we may suppose. That Dan. i, 5, 18, and ii, 1. According Daniel's name should have slipped to the first passage, Daniel and his from the memory of a despotic companions went through a three monarch devoted to his pleasures, is years' course of education before not at all surprising. The invasion they were introduced into the pres. of Judea by Nebuchadnezzar in the ence of the king. According to the third year of Jehoiakim, is not inlatter passage, the dream which deed mentioned by Jeremiah, or by Daniel interpreted, occurred in the the writer of the second book of second year of Nebuchadnezzar. Kings. But from the silence of one This discrepancy has been employ- part of the Bible, we are not to in. ed as one proof that the book is not fer that an event alluded to in anauthentic. But would a pseudo- other part never happened. The Daniel have fallen into this trap? abode of Paul in Arabia, after his How easy to correct such a mistake conversion, is mentioned only in the in a forged compilation! But the epistle to the Galatians. honest writer betrays no undue soli- 4. The use which is made of the citude so to frame all parts of his book of Daniel by the writers of the