The Pulpit Commentary — Daniel — Section 251

finilcucpe, the next question· that rie!ll! le- Most B:igh shall take the kingdom, and Wlllll is the epec.inl asp<'ct of the Meeeinnio possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever kiugdom thnt is intended to be portriiycd and ever. The version of tho Septungint when this tit.le is giYen to its King? If we differs in some points from tho Mnssorctio. nre guided by who.t is ineomparnbly the In the fifteenth verso thcro is no rcfor- olJ!'st interpretntion, that of the second ence to tlio spirit being in the body; it Book of Enoch, this title implies an incn.1- adds "of the night" n.fter "visions," 11nd <'ulnble dignity. When we oome to our Lord's cho.ngcs "my head" into "my thoughts." nse of it in the Gospels, there is nothing to The sixteenth verse presents no essential oppose this. Thus John v. 22, "And bath points of difference. In tho seventeenth committed all judgment unto him, beoansc verse the differences arc moro considor- he is the Son of me.n;" BO Me.tt. ix. 6, able, "These great beasts arc four king- "Tl1c Son of man bath power on earth to dc,ms, which shall bo destroyed from tho fnrgi,e Rins." This is not contradicted by earth." There seems a good deal to l\I Rlt. ,iii. 20, "The foxes have holes, ... but be said for the reading behind this ver- the Son of man bath not where to lay his sion. The first variation, "kingdoms" in- head." The emphasis of the statement lies stead of "kings," may bo due to logio, but in !he contrast between the inexpressible it has further " destroyed from" instead of ,lignity of the Person and the poverty of "arising out of,'' which ce,nnot have resulted his earth], circumstances. It is because from the Massorctio. The verb qoom, " to the ideas of superhuman dignity had been stand up," followed by min, "from," is not associated with the title that our Lord had, elsewhere used in the sense wbioh we find in foretelling his approaching crncifi.xion, in the Massoretio here. Wben one is prone to bring the two fu.cts into close connection, on the earth, as Saul before the revelation of "The Son of man must be lifted up." So the witch of Endor, "he stood up from the after Peter's confession, "The Son of man earth" (1 Sam. xxviil. 23, Targum Jonatho.n) must suffer many things." We see that the -word~or word as here. When Abraham multitude of the Jews understood the title (Gen. x:tii.i. 3, Targum Onkelos) arose from to hu,e this lofty meaning, for they demand before his dead, we have a similar construc- (John xii. 3!),•" How sayest thou, The Son tion. In 2 Sam. xi. 2, "David arose from of man must be lifted up? Who is this his couch." This construction involves Son of mo.n? " The attempts to ma.ke it change of position, either directly or im- imply something humiliating by d'l"elliDg plicitly. It is difficult to understand how on the fact that not adam or ish is the the one reading arose from the other. The word for "ma.n," but 'e11osh, are beside the condensation of the sense as it appears in q uestiun, for these deductions apply to the the Septuagint is not likely to be attained Hebrew words, not to ;the Aramaic. And by a falJariua. In ver. 18 there is nothing in Aramaic neither i•h nor adam is in calling for 1,imark, save that the reduplica- cummon use as equiYalent for "man." It tion of "for ever and ever "is omitted. is as ruuch beside the point as if one, While Theodotion is nearer the Massoretio knowing the difference between man and text, he too differs from it in some points- mann in German, should lay stresli on the his rendering of nidnay by i{,r. Schleusner fact that in this phrase in English "man" thinks this probably a, false reading for has only one n. bccr-rd.rnr. However, in Judg. xiv. 9 we have The connection of this surpassing dignity •c•r used for "body." In the seventeenth with humanity has probably deep roots in verse we have " kingdoms " instead of huma.n nature. The late Professor Fuller "kings." The last clause agrees with tho saw reference here to the function occupied l\Iassoretic, but there is subjoined al o.p8~- b"V Sililr-moo!oo-Khi as mediator between cron,u, "which shall be taken away "-an Iiea and man.kind, and to the further addition that suggests that somo of tho devclopment of this in the Zoroastrian manuscripts before Theodotion had the doctrine of a sosiosh, or redeemer. The same reading as that before the Septuagint full investigation of this is beside our translator. He rende1·s ?fqoomoon min by present purpose. 6.vau-r~crov-ra, brl, showing that at all events he had a different preposition. The redu- Vers. 15-18.-I Daniel was grieved in plication of "for ever and ever" is omitted. my spirit in the midst of my body, and the The Peshitta ver. 15 has "in the midst of visions of my head troubled me. I came my couch" instead of "in the midst of my near unto one of them that stood by, and body." In the sixteenth verse it resolves asked.him the troth of all this. So he told the bystanders into "servants." In the me, and made me know the interpretation seventeenth verse the preposition is not of the things. These grea.t beasts, which min, but 'al. Jerome, instead of corpus, are four, are four kings, which shall arise "body," has in his, "in these,'' as if he out of the earth. Dut the saints of the had read b'id'11a instead of nidna11; he o.lEO  on, vn. 1-28,] TUE IlOOK OF DANIEt. 217