|
There is
considerable disagreement on how the book of the Daniel should be
interpreted. Therefore it is strongly recommended that
you consider performing your own inductive study prior to consulting
any commentaries. The single best inductive study in my opinion is
the Precept Ministries International study on Daniel (click
here), the understanding of which is crucial to an
accurate interpretation of the prophecies in the book of the
Revelation. To state it another way, a full understanding of the
book of the Revelation is impossible without an accurate
understanding of the book of Daniel.
The following is adapted from the introduction to the
Revelation Resources because Daniel is replete with
prophecies, some of which have been fulfilled (assuming a literal
approach) and some of which are yet to be fulfilled. The approach
one takes to the interpretation of the future prophecies in
the book of the Revelation will greatly influence how one interprets
the future prophecies in the book of Daniel. The following
chart summarizes the four main "schools" of interpretation regarding
the prophecies in the Revelation.
Even more
important is to build a firm foundation from your own inductive
study of Daniel before you consult even the most respected
commentary, otherwise you may be confused by the diversity of
interpretations!
The four
views of interpretation of Revelation are summarized in the
following chart. If you would like to see which "school" of
interpretation your favorite commentator espouses,
click here for a list of
authors who are categorized by their main interpretative approach.
Although there are probably some exceptions, the authors in this
list undoubtedly take a similar interpretative approach to the
unfulfilled prophecies in Daniel (Click
here to see Daniel Commentaries categorized by the
approach to the important prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27)
John MacArthur (any of his sermons or publications are highly
recommended) nicely summarizes the "interpretative challenges"
in Daniel noting that
The main challenges center on interpreting passages about future
tribulation and kingdom promises. Though the use of Imperial Aramaic
and archeology have confirmed the early date of writing, some
skeptical interpreters, unwilling to acknowledge supernatural
prophecies that came to pass (there are over 100 in
Daniel 11
alone that were fulfilled), place these details in the
intertestamental times. They see these prophecies, not as
miraculously foretelling the future, but as simply the observations
of a later writer, who is recording events of his own day. Thus,
they date Daniel in the days of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164
b.c.,
Daniel 8;
11:21–45). According to this
scheme, the expectation of the Stone and Son of Man (Da
2,
Da 7) turned out to be a mistaken
notion that did not actually come to pass, or the writer was being
intentionally deceptive." MacArthur takes a literal approach to the
interpretation of Daniel (an approach also taken by this website)
noting that there will be a literal "future 7 year judgment period
(cf. Da 7:21,22; 11:36-45; 12:1) and a literal 1,000 year
kingdom (cf.
Rev. 20) after Christ’s second
coming when He will reign over Israelites and Gentiles (Da 7:27)...an era before and distinct from the final,
absolutely perfect, ultimate state, i.e., the new heaven and the new
earth with its capital, the New Jerusalem (Rev
21,22). The literal interpretation of
prophecy, including Daniel, leads to the premillennial perspective.
Finally MacArthur adds that there
are specific interpretative challenges such as
interpreting numbers (Da 1:12,20;
3:19; 9:24-27); identifying the one like
a Son of Man (Da 7:13,14); determining whether to see Antiochus of
the past or Antichrist of the far future in Da 8:19-23; explaining
the “seventy sevens” in Da 9:24-27; and deciding whether Antiochus
of Da 11:21-35 is still meant in Da 11:36-45, or whether it is the
future Antichrist. (MacArthur, J. J. The MacArthur Study Bible.
Nashville: Word Pub)
|
Preterist |
Preterist (from Latin praeter meaning "past") holds
that through use of symbols and allegory, the Revelation deals
with events that were fulfilled in John's time and that it was
written primarily to provide hope and comfort to the first
century church persecuted by Rome. For example, this view
interprets the beasts of (Rev
13) as imperial Rome and the imperial priesthood.
The preterist view is held by many modern scholars, especially
liberals and those who deny that the Revelation predicts
specific future events. |
|
Historicist |
Views the Revelation as a
symbolic or allegorical prophetic survey of church history
from the first century up to the Second Coming of Christ and
was the view espoused by most of the "reformers". This view
however has been largely discounted as it does not adequately
address the prophesy in the Revelation. The discerning reader
needs to be aware that the historicist view is
reflected in most of the "older" commentaries (many of which
are public domain works easily accessible on the internet)
including the works of John Knox, Martin Luther, John Calvin,
John Wesley, Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield, C. H.
Spurgeon, Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke and Albert Barnes. Unless
you understand their historicist approach to prophesy, you may
become very confused when reading these older "classic"
commentaries. Note that with the exception of Spurgeon, these
works are not included in the list of resources. It is
also important to realize that many of these "classic"
commentaries tend to treat many of the promises to Israel as
now having their primary application to the church, and this
view is firmly disavowed by this website. An example of a
historicist interpretation is the belief that the strong
angel of
Rev 10 symbolizes the
Reformation and that the harlot in
Rev 17 represents the Roman
Catholic church. |
|
Idealist |
Maintains that Revelation is not predictive prophecy, but a
symbolic portrait of the cosmic conflict between the forces of
good and evil. In this view the Revelation becomes merely a
collection of stories designed to teach spiritual truth. Some
refer to this method of interpretation as "Spiritual". |
|
Futurist |
Interprets Revelation 4-22 as predictive of future end time
historical events preceding, during and after the return of
Jesus Christ, the establishment of His 1000 year, millennial
kingdom on earth, followed by the creation of a new heaven and
new earth. Variations of this view were held by the earliest
expositors, such as Justin Martyr (d. 164), Irenaeus (d. c.
195), et al. This futurist approach has enjoyed a revival
since the 19th century and is widely held among evangelicals
today.
Note that as best I can discern, most of the resources
listed below interpret the book of Daniel using a literal
("futuristic")
approach. |
The
interpretative approach taken by this website regarding Revelation
4-22 and the prophetic sections of the book of Daniel is that these
passages describe literal people, places and events
that will be fulfilled in the
future. As someone has well said "If the plain sense makes good
sense seek no other sense lest it result in nonsense." Many of the
resources on this page espouse a similar literal interpretative
view, but this does not necessarily mean that we agree with every
comment in all of the resources.
Bob Deffinbaugh notes that
"What makes the Book of Daniel most profitable for some makes it
most problematic for others. Daniel is one of the great Old
Testament prophets, and these prophecies have a great deal to say
about things yet to come. For the Bible-believing Christian this
puts Daniel on the “must read” list. For the unbelieving skeptic, it
puts the message and meaning of this great book on the “hit list.”
Much that is written about Daniel, then, is written from a critical
perspective. Daniel is profitable for the Christian because it
describes life in Babylon during the dark days of the captivity of
the Jews, in fulfillment of the prophecies God had given this
wayward people. Finally, Daniel is a most profitable book because it
describes the life of a very godly man, living in an ungodly world."
The wide
divergence of interpretative views in the realm of Scripture
prophecy makes it imperative that the discerning reader be a "true
blue" Berean (Acts
17:11) and perform his or her own inductive study prior
to consulting any commentary, tape set, web site or sermon, lest he
or she become mired down in confusing rhetoric and specious
speculation. The Prophecies in Daniel and the Revelation of Jesus
Christ were written to edify, equip, encourage and bless the saints,
not to hopelessly confuse or divide them.
Maranatha! |
|
THREE GENERAL
INTERPRETATIVE
APPROACHES
REGARDING DANIEL 9:24-27
Recommended Resources
(And Some that are
not recommended) |
|
The first group
of resources below accepts Daniel 9:25-26 as a prophecy of the Messiah
and allows for a "Gap" Between Daniel's 69 and 70th Week. The works in
this first group seek the normal, literal interpretation and would in
general be classified as "futurists" and millennialists.
Disclaimer: Note that categorizing an entire work and/or writer's
interpretative approach is undoubtedly somewhat subjective so if you
see a commentary that you know is inappropriately classified, please
email your concern and it will be researched and corrected as needed.
|
|
Anderson, Sir Robert: Daniel
in the Critic's Den and
The Coming Prince
Archer, Gleason L., Jr:
"Daniel" in Expositor's Bible Commentary
(Regency Reference Library 1985) (Or try here but site is very erratic
-
Daniel in Expositor's Bible Commentary)
Arthur, Kay:
19 Part Lecture Series on Daniel
(Precept Ministries International)
Bible Knowledge Commentary.
John Walvoord, Roy Zuck (Victor Books, 1985)
Boice, J M:
Daniel: An Expositional Commentary
(Logos)
Campbell, Donald:
Daniel: God's Man in a Secular Society
(Discovery House, 1988)
Constable, Thomas:
Expository Notes on the Whole Bible (Logos)
Culver, Robert D:
Daniel and the Latter Days.
(Moody Press, 1977)
Deffinbaugh, Bob:
Daniel: Relating Prophecy to Piety
Guzik, Dave:
Brief Expository Notes
(Logos
free download)
Ice, Thomas:
Daniel 9:24-27: The Seventy Weeks
of Daniel (pt 1)
Ironside, H. A.: The
Great Parenthesis (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1943)
Ironside, H. A.:
Daniel (Loizeaux Brothers, 1911) (Logos)
Kelly, William:
Daniel's Seventy Weeks (Colorado:
Wilson Foundation)
KJV Bible commentary. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1994)
Larkin, Clarence:
The Book of Daniel (Larkin Estate,
1929) (See
also)
MacArthur, John:
MacArthur Study Bible (click
here also)
McClain, Alva J: Daniels Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks
(Zondervan, 1960)
Miller, S. R: Daniel: The New American Commentary. (Broadman &
Holman, 1994) (Logos)
Mills, M:
Daniel: A Study Guide to the Book of Daniel
(Dallas: 3E Ministries. 1999)
Pentecost, J. Dwight:
Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology
(Zondervan, 1971)
Pritchard, Ray:
Courageous Living in Turbulent Times
Price, Randall:
Daniel 9:27 Seventy Weeks of Daniel;
Daniel 9 God's Future Program for
Israel
Radio Bible Class:
What Can We Know About The
Antichrist?;
What Can We Know About The
Endtimes?;
What Can We Know About The Second
Coming?
Radio Bible Class:
The Daniel Papers
Richison, Grant:
Devotional Series on Daniel from Campus Crusades
for Christ
Second Coming -
Table comparing Rapture versus
Second Coming
Stedman, Ray:
Expository Series on Daniel
Verse by Verse Notes:
On Daniel 9:24-27 on this website
Walvoord, John:
Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation
(Online Version) - Highly Recommended
Whitcomb, John:
Daniel: Everyman's Bible Commentary
Wood, Leon:
A Commentary on Daniel
(Regency Reference Library, 1973)
Zeisler, Steve:
Expository Sermon Series |
|
The
second group listed below accepts Daniel 9:25-26 as Prophecy of the
Messiah but does not interpret a Gap between Daniel's 69 & 70th Week |
|
Most of these works interpret
Daniel's 70th week as literally following the 69th week and interpret
the he in Daniel 9:27 as the Messiah and not the Antichrist.
Basically most of these writers also do not accept the 1000 year reign
of Messiah on earth (i.e., they are amillennialists) as mentioned in
Revelation 20. |
|
Baldwin, Joyce G: Daniel: An
Introduction and Commentary. (Inter-Varsity Press, 1978). (Baldwin
makes an odd comment that "The numbers are symbolic and not
arithmetical; by the time 69 sevens have passed, God's allotted
seventy is almost complete" She goes on to add that "to him
(Daniel) the 70 years covered the whole of future time, and the
coming of the kingdom looked from his vantage-point like one event.")
Barnes, Albert: Barnes Notes
on the Old Testament (ca 1942)
Calvin, John: Calvin's Commentaries (mid 1500's)
Clarke, A: Clarke's Commentary: Daniel (ca 1850's)
Gill, John: Exposition of the Old and New Testaments (ca
mid-1700's)
Henry, Matthew: Matthew Henry's commentary on the whole Bible
(1706)
Jamieson, R., Fausset, & Brown: A commentary, critical
and explanatory (1871)
Keil, C. F., & Delitzsch, F: Commentary on the Old Testament
(1866-1891) (Presents a difficult to follow discussion which seems to
conclude the 70th week correlates with the end times in which
Antichrist is exterminated, but they interpret the "seven's"
symbolically and thus do not formally espouse a "gap") (Daniel
Commentary)
Young, E J: The Prophecy of Daniel (1949)
Geneva Study Bible: Study Notes (1599)
Mauro, Philip: The Seventy Weeks and the Great Tribulation
(1921)
Leupold, H. C.: Exposition of Daniel (Baker Book House, 1949)
New Bible Commentary (Sinclair Ferguson) |
|
This last
group does not believe Daniel 9:24-27 is a prophecy of the Messiah and
thus these works generally equate with a liberal school of
(non-literal) interpretation |
|
This group generally argues that
Daniel was written in the second century (late date) after all the
historical events prophesied had come to pass and thus they conclude
that the entire book represents the author's (not the original Daniel)
interpretation of past history. In general the commentators this
non-Christological group attempts to find fulfillment of the Daniel's
70 Weeks in the events leading up to the persecution of Antiochus
Epiphanes. In 168 B.C., a pagan altar was constructed on top of the
great altar of burnt sacrifices, and a pagan sacrifice was offered
under the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes. This act precipitated the
Maccabean revolt which Antiochus attempted unsuccessfully to put down
with great cruelty (167-164 B.C.).
The works below are NOT
recommended by this website, and if you
must consult do so cautiously and "be a Berean"! (Acts
17:11) Note that several of these works are published by
companies that one normally considered conservative evangelical
sources, but clearly that does not guarantee that the contents are
thoroughly conservative and evangelical. Examine every commentary
(including the notes you are now reading!) carefully. Hold fast to
those that are true (cf 1Th 5:21-note).
The only way you will personally be able to achieve this goal is to
learn to study the Scriptures inductively (Click
introduction to inductive Bible study).
Solid food (as prepared by careful
inductive study) is for the mature, who because of practice have their
senses trained to discern good and evil (see Hebrews 5:14-note) |
|
Goldingay, John E: Daniel.
Word Biblical Commentary. Volume 30 (Dallas: Word Books, 1989) (For
example he writes that "There is no reason to refer it exegetically
to the first or second coming of Christ.", page 260)
Brown, R. E., Fitzmyer, J. A., & Murphy, R. E: The Jerome
Biblical commentary (1968)
Matthews, V. H., Chavalas, M. W., & Walton, J. H: The IVP Bible
background commentary: Old Testament (InterVarsity Press, 2000)
Montgomery, James A: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on
the Book of Daniel. The International Critical Commentary. (1964)
F F Bruce: A popular commentary series edited by F. F.
Bruce and William Barclay (Abingdon Press) is full of modernistic
thought and historical-critical discussion and specifically in the
volume dealing with Daniel, the book of Daniel is said to have been
written after the fulfillment of the events prophesied therein. In the
same volume we are told that we cannot know who authored the book of
Daniel (though Jesus Christ said Daniel wrote it).
Russell, D. S: Daniel. The Daily study Bible series.
(Westminster John Knox Press, 1981) |
|
