The Pulpit Commentary — Daniel — Section 279

to a.bet their pra.cticcs. A ldny of fierce coun- eeC?nd by 1Jiri7,u,3 311,i3. Tho.t tlrn power of le1111nc8; "strong of countennnco." Thie E_p1phanee wo.e gree.t-gree.ter th"n that of rofere. to oourage o.nd success in wo.r. Thue his brother nnd immed into prcdece•sor-ie Amnzmh (2 Kings xiv. B), when he wishes to undoubted. It is also the caao tho.t he was olmllengo Jonah King of Iera.el, desires to confirmed in hie pla.ce by tho Romnne "look in hie fo.co." Epipho.nee' countcna.nco though, if we e.ro to receive the e.ccr;unt wo.s ono tho.t could euccesefully sto.nd a of Appian, tho direct menne of his elevation hostile meoling. The Greek versions to the throne wo.s the intervention of rcncler 1'1! ('az) by &va,B,lr, "reckless." Un- Eumenes of Pergamus on his behalf. Thne derstanding dark sentences. There mo.y be the reference of the phrase, " not by his own sumo referenco to incantations o.nd super- power," me.y be to this. Little aR he mi~l,t stitious obaervo.nces; it mo.y meo.n that be brook the thought, he was but n subjict- woe well e.cquo.inted with omens, o.ncl how e.lly of the greo.t rep~blie. The other in- to benefit by them. Regordlesanese in the terpretations arn (1) that of Theodon·t, Kr,il matter of religion we.a a prominent cha- Fuller, Hii.vemick, Kranichfeld. o.n,1 ;\fose~ ro.cteristic of Antiochue; but it is quite Stuart, that the reforcnce here is to Divine n possible thing tho.t, like most irreli- power ns setting up Epiphancs to be n gious men, he wlLII superstitious. He cer- scourge to his people; (2) that of von Lcn- to.inly wo.s very keen-sighted in observing gerke, Kliefoth, Bevan, Behnnann, etc., the poli tice.l signs of the times, e.nd very not by might, but by his cunning; (3) that ndroit e.t e.vniling himself of whnt made of Hitzig, which combines the two - his for his own ndvo.ntage. This lo.st ie the cunning is divinely given; (4) that of interpreto.tion of Ewo.ld. Zockler e.nd Calvin e.nd Ewald, that the contra.qt is with Hitzig think it me1ms the.t the king here the might of Alexander the Great. All of 1iictU1"ed "will be cunning to hide hie own these have something to favour t.hem but ucsigne from friend o.nd foe." Yet more also something against them. The;c is common is the view of Keil, Behrmann against the first that there is no reference Stunrt, nnd Devo.n, that it refers generally in the context to the fact, true though it to hie mastery in the use of o.rtifice. The was, that A.ntiochus wo.s raIBcd up by God main difficulty in rega1·d to this view is that for his own purposes. Ago.iDst the secon<l usage docs not support assigning such a is the prenominal suffix, which wonhl be meaning to l}eedotlt. On the other himd, needless if the contrast were between force when we beo.r in mind that here we he.ve o.nd fraud. Of course, Hitzig's combination the lo,nguo.ge of symbol o.nd prophecy, so falls with this. Ago.inst the view e.d ,o- tricks of strategy e.nd chico.no of policy cated by Co.lvin nnd Ewald ia the fact that mo.y o.11 be symbolized by "de.rk se.yinn-s" it seems o. long time to hold the reference without necessary reference to eente;:c;s to Alexo.nder in abeyo.nce. Still, it me.y be such o.s those with which the Queen of urged the.t the vision was before the pro- Shebo. tested the wisdom of Solomon. phet; on the other hand, the relative stren!lth Ver. 24.-A.nd his power shall be mighty, of Epiphanes e.nd Alexander does not se~m but not by hie own power : e.nd he shall to be of importance. We still think tho.t destroy wonderfully, e.nd sho.ll prosper, the real reference is to the fact tho.t he did and p1-aotise, e.nd shall destroy the mighty not attain the throne either by inherito.nce and the holy people. This verse involves or hy his own prowess, but by the help and many difficulties, gre.mmo.tice.l e.nd exe- authority of others, namely, Enmenes nnd getical. These difficulties me.y be so.id to Rome. A11d he fhalt destrfY/j wonderfully. be present in all the versions of this pas- G;r~tz thinks yaslteeth, "destroy," sus- sage. The LXX. renders, "Allll hie power p1c10us, and Professor Beve.n suggests n•::• shall be confirmed, o.nd not in his strength, (yaseelJ), and would render, " He shoii and he shall destroy mo.rvellously, o.nd utter monstrous things;" but, unfortu- prosper nncl do, nnd shall destroy the rulers nately for his view, there is no hint in e.nd people of the saints." The odotion is the versions of e.ny difficulty o.s to the reo.d- so fo1· slo.vishly close to the Massoretio text; ing, nnd, further, r,1:, (sool}) does not meau but ho seems to have reo.d qode,lt, o.n adjec- "utter," hut "meclito.te." ,v e must take tive agreeing with "people," instead of the words as they stand (comp. Jurlg. xiii. q•dosheem, "saints ; " e.nd he omits the 19), o.ncl tre.nsle.te, "He shall destroy por- negative ole.use. The Peshitto is rnry close tentously." Certainly Epiphe.nes we.a to to the Me.seoretic. It empho.sizes the nega- the Jews o. portent of destruction; there he.d tive clo.use by o.clcling d•napJ.slto, o.nd trnns- not been his like - not N ebuchadnezze.r lates "wonders" ineteo.d of "wonderfully." who burned the temple, was to be compo.reJ Jerome, more intent on expressing whe.t is to him who endeavoured to blot out the wor- his own interpreto.tion of the passage tho.n ship of Jehovah altogether : not any other on representing the original, trnnslates the of the Greek monarchs. He we.s unique in first !tee! ("power") by fortitudo, e.nd the his enmity ng1\inst God and his worship. Ha 24A THE BOOK OF DANIEL. [en. vm. 1-2t