The Pulpit Commentary — Daniel — Section 145

of l\n nnimal, but e.lso e. mueioe.l horn ; it is the word extremely doubtful, but even were nlso true that or•pd.-.w is the diminutive it gm.n.ted that there was I\ word there it ie from or,pa.,; but it ie not to be B.BBUmed tluit not at all certain that it was n word' con• e.U the ecnsee of the original word e.re re- nected with the Greek o-uµ<1>owla. As the tained by the diminutive. A "lance" ie assailants of tho authenticity of Danial the name given both t,o e. medi<'al instru- have laid the grc1tt stress of their e.rgu• !'1ent e.nd to e. weapon used by ce.valry : ment on those words, e.ncl, e.s we have seon, it does not follow from this the.t since these words 1tfford but dubious evidence, we "e. lancet" is a medioe.l instrument it ie me.y consider ourselves to havo a right to also_ a military weRpon. There is certainly demand from them to abandon thoir opposi• no rnetance to support the assertion thnt tion, or show reason why they do not. there ever WRS such a usage. As nntu- rall~- it might be used of a drinking-horn. If the r,·R<ling 1<,paµ.fov is adopted, tlrn Vere. 16-18.-Shadraoh, Keahaoh, and meaning "--ssigncd to ,;uµ.tf,wvla loses even Abed-nego, answeNd and ■aid to the king, the Jiruitcd plausibility it had. This view 0 Nebuchadneae.r, we e.N not oareful to "as presented years ago by Dr. Pusey, yet answer thee in this matter. If it be so our Canon Dri1•er and Professor Bevan he.ve re- God whom we serve is able to deliv;r ue peated their exploded statements without from the burning fiery furnace, and he will th,, faintest attempt at answering the deliver us out of thine hand, O king. :Out counter-arguments. Were any defender of if not? be it known unto thee, o king, that Dnniel to be guilty of anything si.mile.r, we will not serve thy gods, nor-worship hi~ ignorance would be sneered at, a.nd his the golden image which thou hast set up. ergmuents hustled ont of court. The Septuagint Version differs in several But there is a further question-Is sipho- slight points from the Massoretic, "And nia the same word as <TVµ.tf,wvl.a? That the Shad.racb, Meshach, and Abednego answered m (u) might disa.ppear and the upsikm of a~d :said to the King Nebuchadnezzar, 0 the Greek might be represented by yod in king, we have no need to answer thee in Aramaic, is not impossible, bot the fa.et regard to this C{;mmaud, for our God in the th:it, on the one side, there is the Greek heavens is one Lord, whom we fear, who ie '-Ord <ricp,.,v, on the other there is the Ee.st- able to deliver us from the homing fiery em Aramaic word tziphonia, throws grave furnace, and will deliver us out of thy doubt on this. With regard to :i:, Stre.ck hands, a.nd then it she.II be manifest to thee (' Lehrbuch,' p. 15) declares that :i: is inter- that we neither serve thy gods, nor the changed with D before t sounds, and at golden image which thou hast set up do the end of words; from thls we deduce that we worship." In thls version we see the six- ~iplwnia c:i.nnot be derived etymologic- teenth verae agrees with the Massoretie; in nlly from eumphonya. On the other hand, the next verses there are considerable differ• aiphonya may readily be the product of ui- cnces. The Septuagint translator seems to plwnfo, through the intervention of the Greek have read some part of ',n, (d•li.al) instead of a,tf,oov, and perhaps the Hebrew i:pc (Bi'tph), rn',;i (pal'li.een). We cannot be certain that "a reed." Changes otherwise impossible Kvp,os represents mn• here, from the fact that a.re rendered possible when they lead to a the mannerism of the translator expresses word with an intelligible sound. There is itself in a preference for rendering o•n',N by a verb :ye, both Chaldee and Hebrew, which, Kvp,os. The Septuagint has ,,..,v X"P"'v in• however, does not seem to ha-re any close stead of T,/s X"p&s. Not improbably the connection with "jl!:l, "a reed," or to have any 01·iginal was dual, but the dual had practi- ruu~ical meaning. It is wed in Biblical cally disappeared from Hellenistic Greek, Cl,aldee for the fulfilment of a prophecy ( eh. There seems a reference to the creed of the iv. 30), in Targumic Che.Idec "to have a.n Jew (Dent. vi 4) and to Pe. cxv. 3; speak- end,"" locease"(Onkelos, Lev.xxvL20). The ing of Goo as " God of heaven " occurs in same verb with the so.me meaning occurs in the previous chapter, ver. 18, and in ver. Syriac (Luke ix. 54). This is an additional 28 Daniel speaks of his God as "in the evidence tLut tziphonia h! the original form heaven." However suitable, the first por- of th~ word. In transferring the word to tion is yet to be put aside ae an addition. CLaldcc, they gave it a form intelligible The second portion of this differing clause t.c, tLose who UBed that tongue. If Syriac occurs in 'l'heodotion, and of it we shall W(•r<o the languoge in which Daniel was shortly speak. There are several other less written, then the meaning of the word in important differences over which we need tl,at language is important. Castclli--on not delay. 'fheodoLion has, like the Sep- what authority we know not-gives the tuagint, iv o'>pavois, and like tho Septuagint meaning of tz•µlionya, e. word all but identi- has tLo enclitic connection -ya.p, instead of cal wit!. tl,e.t L(-fore us, as tibia, tuba. the somewhat abrupt connection of the Alt,Jgdher, not only is the genuineness of Me.ssorctic, although the phrnse, "in the llIT, III. 1-::J0,] THE BOOK OF DANIEf,. 107