Peters

Home
Video
Audio
Links
Contact
Donate
Guest Book
Chat
Studies
Resources
Out of The City
Power Point

Title: THE MYSTERY OF THE 'THE DAILY'; An Exegesis of Daniel 8:9-14

Author: John W. Peters

Publisher: SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, ANDREWS UNIVERSITY

1994 THESIS book code:TAMID

JHB copied from: Adventist Pioneer Library CD file: Recent.NFO

2001 Calumet St

Flint, MI 48503

(810) 767-0843

December 23, 1992

Revised and Expanded December 1993

Expanded with Minor Additions July 1994

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1.0 Introduction 1

2.0 Historical Overview 1

3.0 Statement of the Problem 4

4.0 Translation 5

5.0 Exegesis of Daniel 8:9-12 6

5.1 Pagan/Papal Rome Identification 6

5.1.1 Gender Oscillations in Dn. 8:9-12

5.1.2 Gender Identification in Verse 9

5.1.3 Gender Identification in Verse 10

5.1.4 Gender Identification in Verse 11

5.1.5 Gender Identification in Verse 12

5.1.6 Self-Consistent Gender Summary

5.2 Verse 11 and "The Daily" 14

5.2.1 The Antecedent of "From Him" (mimmennu)

5.2.2 The Daily

5.2.2.1 Rum: "take away" or "lift up"

5.2.2.2 Hattamid Linkage with Gadal

5.2.2.3 Hattamid: The Daily Identified

5.2.2.4 Tamid and Paganism in the OT

5.2.3 The Place of His Sanctuary

5.2.3.1 Miqdash

5.2.3.2 Makon

5.3 Verse 12 and "The Transgression" 37

5.3.1 The Daily, the Host and the Horn

5.3.2 The Transgression

6.0 Cultic Terminology in Daniel 8:9-14 43

7.0 Cultic Language in Leviticus and Counterfeit 45

Parallels in Daniel 8

7.1 Identification of Hattamid 50

7.1.1 The Burnt Offering

7.1.2 The Grain Offering

7.1.3 Hattamid/Sweet Aroma Connection

7.1.3.1 Hattamid Burnt Offering

7.1.3.2 Hattamid Grain Offering

7.1.3.3 Hattamid Bread

7.2 Counterfeit Hattamid/Sweet Aroma 56

7.3 Counterfeit Priesthood 58

8.0 The Audition About the Sanctuary 63

Exegesis of Daniel 8:13-14

8.1 Verse 13: The Daily and the Transgression 63

8.1.1 The Daily

8.1.2 The Transgression

8.1.3 Causing Desolation

8.1.4 Qodesh

8.2 2300 Evening-Morning: Cultic Significance 68

8.2.1 The Daily Burnt Offering

8.2.2 The Continually Burning Lamps

8.2.3 The Continual Cloud

8.3 Sanctuary Trampled 2300 Evening-Morning 76

& Cleansed: Thesis-Antithesis

8.3.1 The Daily and Trampling the Sanctuary

8.3.2 The Integrity of the 2300 Evening-Morning

8.3.3 Termination of the 2300 Evening-Morning

9.0 External Evidence from Daniel 9:23-27 87

9.1 Verses 26-27: Translation and Explanation 88

9.2 Summary 91

10.0 External Evidence of Daniel 11:31 93

11.0 External Evidence of Daniel 12:11 97

12.0 Conclusion 101

APPENDIX 109

The Daily and the Restrainer

2 Thessalonians 2:6-7

1.0 Introduction 109

1.1 The Man of Sin

1.2 The Restrainer and the Daily

2.0 Translation of 2 Thessalonians 2:3-9 112

3.0 Exposition of 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7 113

3.1 Linguistic Evidence of Concurrent Time

3.2 Linguistic Evidence from ginomai

3.3 The Mystery of Lawlessness and the Daily

4.0 Conclusion 120

BIBLIOGRAPHY 123

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The fundamental pillar of the Seventh-day Adventist Church is the sanctuary doctrine, "a key which unlocked the mystery of the disappointment of 1844" and which "opened to view a complete system of truth".1 [GC423] Intimately associated with an unraveling of the time prophecy of Daniel 8:14 was an understanding of the "daily" (hattamid) in 8:11-13. Differing views of the "daily" have prevailed since the time of the Reformers to the present alternating initially from Christ's High Priestly ministry to pagan Rome reverting to the current view, held by most Adventist scholars, of Christ's ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. Following a brief historical overview of the interpretation of "the daily", a statement of the exegetical problems and issues of Daniel 8:9-14 will be presented with primary emphasis on verses 9-13. Both internal exegetical evidence from 8:9-14 and external evidence from Dn. 9:23-27; 11:31 and 12:11 will be examined leading to a self-consistent understanding of "the daily" which confirms the historical roots of the foundational pillar of Seventh-day Adventism.

-----------------------------------

*Note all footnotes are in the text at the underlined footnote number in a popup box. To view footnote double-click with mouse on footnote number. [JHB note: This only works within the Folio Views program, when this thesis is loaded. Start Folio Views, mount Adventist Pioneer Library CD, load file: Recent.NFO, click John W. Peters. Many footnote references have been inserted in brackets here in this copy - list of abbreviations below.]

0002

2.0 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW

The pioneer reformer of the "Great Advent Awakening," William Miller, interpreted the time prophecies of Dn. 8:14 and Dn. 12:11 by connecting the "daily" (or the continuance) of Daniel with the restrainer in Paul's second epistle to the Thessalonians.2 [MC10/5/43,52-53] Miller's interpretation of the "daily" in Dn. 12:11-12 was based on the hermeneutical principle of analogy of scripture,3 [FSDA38] comparing Daniel with 2 Thess. 2:7. He identified the man of lawlessness as papal Rome, while the restraining power in the development of the papacy was interpreted as paganism. Through analogous reasoning Miller concluded that the "daily" also signified paganism which gave way to papal Rome. The daily was interpreted as the "daily abomination" or the first abomination and was represented as paganism in general, or Rome more specifically. The "abomination that makes desolate" was identified as papal Rome. Thus in Dn. 12:11, the Roman empire would be taken away and papal Rome would be set up.4 [FSDA38-39]

Following the great disappointment, the pioneers of Seventh-day Adventism including Joseph Bates, James White, J. N. Andrews, Uriah Smith, J. N. Loughborough and S. N. Haskell among others embraced Miller's identification of the "daily" as pagan Rome whose sanctuary (the city of Rome) was inherited by the papacy. This connected view of the "daily" in Dn. 8:11-13; 11:31; 12:11 with 2 Thess. 2:7 was theologically part of Adventist heritage up until 1900.

0003

Then L. R. Conradi in Germany reinterpreted the "daily" as referring to the true sanctuary service and Christ's High Priestly ministry in heaven. Conradi believed the papacy took away Christ's priestly ministry by substituting the mass and a system of human priesthood in which the pope had assumed the position of Jesus. This so-called "new view" of the daily was not new at all, but was taught and held in principle by many of the leading Protestant reformers.5 [LBR397-399] In reality what many considered new light was the view embraced by William Miller and the pioneers which leads to the fundamental and foundational pillar of Seventh-day Adventism, the sanctuary doctrine. However, by 1919 many prominent church leaders, including A. G. Daniells and W. W. Prescott, accepted Conradi's view of the "daily".

Conradi and some others who endorsed his view of the "daily" later apostatized by gradually adopting divergent views concerning the heavenly sanctuary, rejecting the inspiration of E. G. White having opposed the message of Christ's righteousness by faith at the 1888 General Conference. This opposition extended to Ellen White's unequivocal endorsement of the message. Conradi later adopted the evangelical concept that Luther had heralded the three angels' messages.6 [LBR475]

Implications of Conradi's New View. Desmond Ford was Adventism's most notable scholar to have followed Conradi's view of

0004

the "daily" resulting in his ultimate rejection of the sanctuary doctrine as the central pillar of the SDA church. Ford's scholarly arguments swept away numerous Adventist ministers and bright lights. Largely in an effort to stem the tide of this rejection and to justify Conradi's new view of the daily as Christ's High Priestly ministry, a theological counter-attack was initiated. Some of Adventism's foremost theologians and scholars under the auspices of the Biblical Research Institute published monumental works supporting the historical view of the sanctuary.7 [SD] These efforts have resulted in significant and beneficial achievements; however, the exhaustive exegesis of Dn. 8:9-14 has left unresolved certain linguistic and contextual difficulties regarding the new view of the "daily" in Daniel.

3.0 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Linguistically some of the most apparently difficult passages in scripture occur in Dn. 8:9-14. The text abounds with linguistic and contextual nuances. For example: 1) The gender of the verbal subjects and pronouns referring to the "horn from littleness" in verse 9 oscillates from masculine to feminine in verses 9-12; 2) Does the "daily" refer to an earthly power or an activity? 3) What is the self-consistent relationship of the "daily" in Dn. 8:11, 13; 11:31 and 12:11? 4) What is the significance of Daniel's use of

0005

the Hebrew verbal root rum for the action imposed on the "daily" in 8:11 in contrast with the Hebrew root sur in 11:31 and 12:11? 5) What is the significance of Daniel's use of two different Hebrew words, miqdash in 8:11 & 11:31 and qodesh in 8:13 & 14, translated as sanctuary? 6) Does the use of makon for "place" in 8:11 instead of maqom have textual significance? 7) Is there a self-consistent application of the Hebrew participle shomem (desolating) in 8:13; 9:26-27; 11:31 and 12:11? 8) What is the significance of the Hebrew cultic language used in Dn. 8:9-14? An examination of these questions among other issues will help to shed light on the interpretation of the "daily" (hattamid) in Daniel.

4.0 TRANSLATION OF DANIEL 8:9-14

Vs. 9 And out of one of them he (masculine) came, a horn from littleness, which became very great toward the south and toward the east, and toward the glory.

Vs. 10 And it (feminine) became great even to the host of the heavens. And it (fem.) made fall to the ground (some) from the host and (some) from the stars and trampled them.

Vs. 11 Even unto the Prince of the host he (masculine) exalted himself. And from him (mas.) was lifted up the daily (continuance) and the place of his (mas.) sanctuary was cast down.

Vs. 12 It (feminine) was given even a host against the daily by means of transgression. And it (fem.) cast down truth to the ground and it (fem.) worked and it (fem.) prospered.

Vs. 13 Then I heard a certain holy one speaking and another holy one said to that one who spoke, "Until when the vision, the daily and the transgression which desolates making both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled".

Vs. 14 And he said unto me, "Until 2300 evening-morning, then the sanctuary shall be put right (cleansed)".

0006

5.0 EXEGESIS OF DANIEL 8:9-12

The vision (chazon) described in Daniel 8 of the ram and the goat with a broken horn "in place of which four notable ones came up toward the four winds of heaven" forms the contextual framework, discussed in depth by

0007

Shea8 [DARCOM2 165-255; 256-330; 497-526], and Hasel,9 [DARCOM2 378-461] of Dn. 8:9-14. The origin of the "horn from littleness" which comes out of the four winds of heaven has been clarified previously.10 [DARCOM1 41-43],11 [DARCOM2 387-394] There is general agreement among Adventist scholars that the horn from littleness in verse 9 which "became very great" and "cast down some of the host" in verse 10 represents Rome in its two phases, both pagan and papal Rome.

5.1 PAGAN/PAPAL ROME IDENTIFICATION

Although there is agreement that both pagan and papal Rome are represented in 8:9-12, there is significant disagreement between Hasel and Shea in distinguishing papal and pagan activity in the individual verses. For example, Hasel12 [DARCOM2 381, 399] argues that a "horizontal activity" of pagan Rome is represented by verses 9 & 10 whereas the vertical activity of papal Rome is revealed in verses 11 & 12. Shea,13 [DARCOM2 507-512] on the other hand, argues for a horizontal movement of pagan imperial Rome in verse 9 but a vertical movement of papal Rome against the host of heaven in verse 10. Shea suggests that an attack of a religious character is portrayed in vs. 10 similar to that in Dn. 7: 21-22, 25, 27 by papal Rome against the saints of the Most High.

5.1.1 Gender Oscillations in Dn. 8:9-12. It is readily apparent from the Hebrew Masoretic text that the gender of the verbal subjects and pronouns alternate from feminine to masculine to feminine in verses 10-12 respectively. Hasel argues that the gender change from feminine in 10 to masculine in verse 11 denotes a change in activity from pagan to papal Rome; he suggests further that verses 9 and 10 are of a pagan nature and verses 11 and 12 of a papal nature.14 [DARCOM2 399] His reasoning by gender identification fails to explain the reversion to the feminine gender in verse 12 ("it cast truth to the ground") which is a definitive reference to papal Rome which should be, by his reasoning, in the masculine gender. Hasel dismisses this anomaly simply by suggesting the feminine (it) refers to another aspect of the horn's (feminine) activity alluded to in verse 9.15 [DARCOM2 418-419]

We agree with Hasel in principle that the gender alternation in Dn. 8:9-12 has significant implications regarding the identification of the specific phase of the horn's activity. But

0008

a more comprehensive and self-consistent approach to gender oscillations is adopted in this exegesis of Daniel 8:9-14.

5.1.2 Gender Identification in Verse 9. The primary verb in verse 9 is yatza (to come out) in a Qal perfect, masculine form. However, the nearest subject noun, "a horn of littleness" is feminine which grammatically precludes a subject-verbal linkage. Hasel attempts to explain the anomaly based on Hebrew syntax of a verb preceding as animal subject requiring a masculine form.16 [DARCOM2 401] Although this may be a viable solution based on Hebrew syntax, it is suggested that a more substantive and realistic solution revolves around Daniel's intentional use of Hebrew syntax to a create a distinction by gender between the 2 phases of the horn from littleness and their independent and unique activities delineated in verses 9-12. In verse 9 the evident solution to the gender anomaly is that Daniel intended the masculine verbal subject (he came out) to be accompanied by an explanatory appositional phrase, "a horn from littleness". Thus verse 9 reads; "out of one of them he came, a horn from littleness, which became great toward the south..."). The net effect is that the horizontal activity of the horn described by Shea earlier17 [DARCOM2 507-512] in verse 9 is correlated with the masculine gender which in turn corresponds to pagan Rome's expansion of power. Daniel's intentional use of Hebrew syntax to distinguish between the two phases of the horn by means of gender distinction will become evident as the discussion on gender in verses 10-11 proceeds.

0009

5.1.3 Gender Identification in Verse 10. In verse 10, the subjects are all verbal in nature and each one is feminine in form. Although it can be argued that feminine verbal subjects refer to the horn from littleness (inherently feminine), this logic would also require the verbal forms of verse 11 to be feminine (it exalts itself); but the verbal form is masculine (he exalts himself). Hence it is suggested that Daniel intended a gender change from masculine in verse 9 to feminine in verse 10 to indicate a distinct phase change in activity of the horn. The papal aspect of the activity in verse 10 is readily apparent. According to Shea the focus of the activity in verse 10 has a vertical dimension clearly exhibiting a religious character with the horn attacking the host and stars of heaven, symbolically the people of God.18 [DARCOM2 511] This religious persecution is described in Dn. 7:21 & 25 which is explicitly related to the papal phase of Rome according to all historicist expositors.

5.1.4 Gender Identification in Verse 11. The dramatic shift in gender to masculine in verse 11 (he exalted himself) reflects a change in phases of the two entities which the metaphor symbol of the horn represents as suggested by Hasel.19 [DARCOM2 401] Whereas Hasel argues that the masculine gender in verse 11 indicates a shift to papal Rome from pagan Rome in verse 10, it is suggested the change to masculine in v. 11 represents a renewed emphasis on the pagan phase of Rome contrasted with papal phase in verse 10.

0010

The one who magnified himself even to the Prince of the host is identified in Acts 4:26-28 by the apostle Peter: "The kings of the earth---gathered against the Lord and His Christ. For truly Your holy Servant Jesus whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose determined to be done".

Acts 4:26-28 is an allusion to Ps. 2:1 in which the "kings of the earth have set themselves and the rulers have met together against Jehovah and His Anointed". Further evidence that the one exalting himself in Dn. 8:11 is pagan Rome is found in 8:25 where "he (a king) stands up against the Prince of princes" which bears a striking resemblance to Ps. 2:1. Contrary to most Adventist expositors, it is suggested that the kingly power of 8:23-25 is an explicit description of pagan Rome throughout, although papal Rome may be implicit. Three reasons for this proposition are set forth: l) All the verbal subjects and adjectival pronouns are masculine corresponding with the masculine designations of verse 9 and 11 which it was suggested referred to pagan Rome; 2) The strong linguistic similarity of Dn. 8:25d ("also against the Prince of princes he shall stand") with Ps. 2:1 and also the internal relationship of Dn. 8:11 with 8:25d , and finally 3) the one (a king) who "shall be broken without hand" in 8:25e is linguistically similar to the Aramaic of Dn. 2:45 ("a stone was cut out of the mountain without hands and broke in pieces the iron..."). The reference in 2:45

0011

refers to pagan, political powers and the linguistic similarity to the Hebrew of 8:25 lends credibility to the suggestion of pagan, kingly power throughout 8:23-25. For example, "he shall destroy the holy people" in 8:25 alludes to Rome's action of destroying the city and the sanctuary in Dn. 9:26 and 11:22. The deceitful tactics of this kingly power are alluded to in 8:25 and its pagan, deceitful characteristics are revealed in 11:23, a clear reference to pagan Rome.20 [DR258]

TAMID page 0011 paragraph 1 Furthermore, the historical record substantiates pagan Rome's consistent self exaltation to the Prince of the host. Emperor Octavian's (31 BC-AD 14) adoptive father Caesar, at the Senate's decree, was elevated to a place among the deities. "Thereafter Octavian called himself son of the Caesar, imperator Caesar divi filius." Octavius added to his name the one of "Augustus" emphasizing the unique dignity of his position. Until that time this designation (meaning "the exalting one"; cf. Dn. 8:11, "he exalted himself") had been employed only as a surname of deities conveying the impression that his position of power was of incomparable loftiness.21 Herod the Great, a native vassal ruler of Palestine under the Romans, exalted to the Prince of the host by slaughtering the infants in Bethlehem seeking to destroy the Christ (Mt. 2:3-16).22

0012

Emperor Caligula (AD 27-41) exhibited exaggerated striving for godlike exaltation and demanded worship of himself and ordered his statue placed in the temple at Jerusalem which was thwarted by his death in AD 41.23 Emperor Nero (AD 54-68), along with Caligula and Domitian, claimed deity for himself while still alive and each one failed to receive the honor at death which was normally the customary practice of the emperor cult started by the Roman Senate of deifying their deceased emperors who had served well.24 Emperor Domitian (AD 81-96) emphasized his unlimited power as ruler and sought to exhibit the sanctity of his person publicly and liked to be greeted by the cry: "Hail to the lord and his consort!"25 The biblical and historical records are clear and confirm that the one exalting himself to the Prince of the host is characterized by pagan Rome, the precursor to papal Rome who inherited the same characteristics.

TAMID page 0012 paragraph 1 5.1.5 Gender Identification in Verse 12. Further evidence that pagan Rome is represented by the masculine gender in verse 11 is the very fact that the gender reverts back to feminine verbal forms representing papal Rome in verse 12. Verse 12 in its entirety is an unmistakable allusion to the action of papal Rome opposing the "daily" in which it cast truth to the ground, it worked, and it prospered (all feminine verbal subjects in Hebrew). Exegesis of verse 12 will be developed in a later section.

0013

TAMID page 0013 paragraph 1 5.1.6 Self-Consistent Gender Summary. Shea has suggested that the gender oscillations in verses 9-12 are due to Hebrew syntax which is unique to Daniel.26 Since this effect of syntax (see preceding footnote) on determining the gender of verbs finds no precedent in other portions of the book of Daniel or the OT, it seems more reasonable to conclude that Daniel's intentional use of unique syntax in chapter 8 is to create a distinction by gender between the two phases of the horn delineated in verses 9-12.

TAMID page 0013 paragraph 2 The net effect of the gender oscillations from masculine to feminine to masculine and to feminine in verses 9-12 reveals a thematic parallelism of gender with the pattern A:B::A':B'. Daniel emphasizes the two-phase aspect of Rome by two distinct parallel and repetitive cycles (masculine:feminine) in verses 9 & 10 and again in 11 & 12. The thematic parallelism of gender in verses 9-12 with the A:B::A':B' pattern is summarized below in the following chart. Confirmation of the significance of the pagan/papal identification by gender distinction will be established from evidence derived from the counterfeit cultic language and symbols of Daniel 8 which will be presented in Sections 6.0 & 7.0.

0014

THEMATIC PARALLELISM OF GENDER

A:B::A':B'

TAMID page 0014 paragraph 1

Verse Gender Verb/Pronoun Horn's Phase

A 9 MASC. HE CAME (yatza) PAGAN

B 10 FEM. IT BECAME GREAT (tigdal) PAPAL

A' 11 MASC. a) HE EXALTED (gadal) PAGAN

b) FROM HIM (mimmennu)

B' 12 FEM. a) IT CAST DOWN (shalak) PAPAL

b) IT WORKED ('asah)

c) IT PROSPERED (tzalehach)

0015

5.2 VERSE 11 AND THE DAILY

TAMID page 0015 paragraph 1 A foundation has been laid for the identification of Rome in its two phases in Dn. 8:9-12 by demonstrating the earthly expansion of pagan Rome in verse 9 and the religious attack of papal Rome in verse 10 on the hosts of heaven. Attention will now be focused on 8:11. The literal translation of the first clause in verse 11a reads, "even unto the Prince of the host he exalted himself". Evidence was previously presented by context and gender identification that the one exalting himself was pagan Rome. However, the pivotal issue concerning the interpretation of the "daily" is a determination of "from whom" the "daily" is removed or lifted up in the second clause (verse 11b) which literally reads, "and from him the daily was lifted up". Thus, the pivotal issue of the exegesis revolves around the identification of the antecedent of "from him".

TAMID page 0015 paragraph 2 5.2.1 The Antecedent of "From Him" (mimmennu). Two choices are possible for the antecedent: 1) the Prince of the host or 2) the one exalting himself. Upon this choice, the "daily" will be associated either with the Prince of the host or the pagan phase of the horn from littleness. Hasel dedicates three short sentences in his 84 page exegesis to this problem. He relies on "grammatical nearness" supported by the Greek Septuagint, the Theodotian and the Latin Vulgate for his decision that the antecedent of "from him" is the Prince of the host.27 However, relying solely on the Hebrew Masoretic text, rather than a secondary Greek translation, and strictly using the basis of "grammatical nearness", the first clause in verse 11a concludes with "he exalted himself" (higdil) and the second clause in verse 11b begins with "from him" (mimmennu). The translation of mimmennu as "from him" in contrast to "by him" is confirmed by the cultic language parallels (see Section 7.0) in Leviticus where both rum and mimmennu are used in conjunction with one another.28 It is immediately evident on the basis of grammatical nearness that the antecedent of "from him" is the one exalting himself or pagan Rome. As Hasel points out in a footnote,29 syntactically the first two clauses in verse 11 are inverted verbal clauses, meaning the object precedes the verb which contains the subject, contrary to normal word order. It is suggested that Daniel inverted the normal Hebrew syntax of these two clauses for the specific purpose of making an unmistakable connection of the antecedent (he exalted himself) associated with the phrase,

0016

"from him", by placing them adjacent to one another ("...he exalted himself, and from him..."). An internal reflection of the type A:B::B':C results from this inverted syntax with the end of verse 11a reflecting the identification of the first word (prepositional phrase: "from him") in verse 11b. This is illustrated in the following chart.

INTERNAL REFLECTION OF DANIEL 8:11

A:B::B':C

TAMID page 0016 paragraph 1

A = EVEN UNTO THE PRINCE OF THE HOST VERSE 11a

B = HE EXALTED HIMSELF VERSE 11a

B'= AND FROM HIM VERSE 11b

C = THE DAILY WAS LIFTED UP VERSE 11b