The Pulpit Commentary — Daniel — Section 176

connie, the period of the Penrian domination spoken by angels was steadfRst.") Tho and thn.t of the en,rly Greek suprome.cy view seems to be tho.t the Almighty had "'as ono in which the n,ngelic hiern,rchy e. oouncil of angels, and before them was we.s enormously increased n,nd made vastly every question discussed ere it was deoreed. more oomplex than it. hn,d been before. In short, thnt there we.a a heavenly Further, ii is to be nolC'd that "the watchers," sanhcdrin, corresponding to that on earth j'1'i,' ('eeree11), are here distingnished abBO- -an idea which wo.s developed by the lutely from "the holy ones,'' l''!"'"'.'R (qad- Talmudists. It appears in Enoch, not yet de-e,,hee" ), whereas in ver. 10 (13) "tho fully developed. In Enoch xii. certain wa.fobers " nnd "the holy onos " are of the wn tchers e.rc denounced A.'! hn ving identified. This distinction ie made in defiled themselves with women ; in eh. xx. later Jewish oommontators, n.nd therefore we have the name of the holy o.ngels who its presence here, in contre.dietinotion to watch, and in thie chapter we have the ver. 13, is proof of a relatively late origin d.IB'erent provinces assigned to el\Oh of for this claUBe. Zockler would a.void this them. Six e.re enamera.tcd. They have by asserting e. parallelism of members in thus no collective function. In the portion this sentence; but, in the first plaoo, this of Enoch preserved in Syncellus, men are ie not verse, but prose, e.nd therefore represented as calling to the heavens and parallelism need not be <;Xpccted. Further, ad!1ressing ~cm; e.nd the four a~gels, r,~ (g<royraJJ,) is "e. decree" given by e. Michael. Unel, Raphael, e.nd Gabriel give answer by looking down upon the ~a.rth, person in authority, e.nd n~!:!lf1 (sh'al,a,yth) is and they see the blood that is being shed "a 'petition" pl'C8entcd to one in authority. by violence. Then follows the statement, So far from the two being identified in " And the four archangels came before the the verse before us, the watchers e.nd the Lord, and so.id." They may be here ea.id holy o:n.es arc as absolutely contr&l!tcd as to act in a collective capacity, but they they oan be. Bevan simply appeals to have no deliberative function, still less have vcr. 10 (13) to prove their identity- they any power to decree. The interpolated 110nse has no influence with him. When verse before us thus represents an angelo- we turn to Theodotion, we find that, in logy more developed than that of the date his practical identity with the Massoretic of the Book of Enoch. And settet.h up O'Der it t.ext, he he.s preserved the contrast between the bai;esl of men. This phrase suggests the " decree " and " petition," the former word " vile person,'' ol!~l ( m"b•zeh), of eh. xi. 21, being represented by ,n'ry1<p,µ.a, and the who is probably ·Epipha.nes-the reference 11econd by hr,p:fJr-r1µa.. These two words in this interpolated verse is not unlikely represent fairly well the ilistinction between the same. The Syriao form of r,,',v in the ;;;,; : (g'wyrah ), and ~?~~ ( sh"aylo.h). It is K'thib has to be observed. One peculiarity probable that u,ry1<p1µa. is used instead of 1<plµ.a. which points to interpolation is the Hebrew in order to show that ,tp is to be regarded e.s plural here used, c•~~tt ( 0 niisheem). Were genitive plnre.l. The Peshitta follows the it not that our snspicions of this verse are Massoretic, but less closely. It has "1'1), deepened by examination of it, we should " watcher," in the singular. This clause be inclined to see e. reference to that in the Syriac should be rendered, "accord- usurpation of Nebuchadnezzar's throne, ing to the decrees of the watcher is this which Lenormant thinks is implied in the order, and according to the word of the title N eriglissar gives to his father. There holy one is the request; " it retains the seems to be e. reference to something like diBtinction in question much e.s it is in the this in ver. 24 of this chapter, according t.o recrcived text, but with e. distinct d.IB'erence the version of the LXX. of meaning in regard to the other words of Ver. 18.-This dree.m I King Nebuohadnez. the clause. So, too, Jerome in the Vulgatc mr have seen. Now thoa, 0 :Belteshe.zzar, translates," In scntentia vigilnm decretum dec!are the interpretation thereof, forasmuch est et sermo BB.nctorum et petitio,'' thus as e.ll the wise men of my kingdom e.re not maintaining, in all the confusion there is able to make known unto me the interpre- in this rendering, the ilistinction we have te.tion: but thoa art able ; for the spirit of referred to. In the final clause, the Vnlgate the holy gods is in thee. This verse is is further e.stray from the Massoretic, trans- wholly omitted in the Septuagint. On the lating, super eum. The theology of this other hand, the verse in the Septuagint pas,age is singular, BO singular that, were which occupies this place is totally di1l'erent it IJOt for the omission of the passage from from anything in the Massoretic text: t1e Stptuugint, and its contra.diction of "Before me was it cut down in one day, ver. 13, we might be inclined to think it e.nd its destruction was in one hour of the nrnst Le gt,nuine. (For a similar statement, day, and its branches were given to every srx Gal. iii. 19. "T1.-, Law ... was ordained wind, and it was driven out aud dragged by e.ngel,; ; " !fob. ii. 2, " If fue word forth, e.nd it ate the grass of the earth, and en. IV, 1-87.] THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 13!)