THE KING’S BUSINESS
20
to care to admit that for the personal ity of Daniel we have the contempor ary evidence of Ezekiel. He quotes with approval the words of Prof. Dav idson who writes: “It is scarcely natural that the pro phet should mention Daniel in such terms, grouping him at the same time with two patriarchs of antiquity, if he were really a younger contemporary of his own. . . . . The association with Noah and Job imply rather that in the mind of the prophet the Daniel whom he referred to, was some ancient patri arch, renowned in the traditions of Is rael for his piety and \fisdom” (quoted in Driver’s Daniel Int. pp. xxvii., xxviii. This objection based on the youth fulness of Daniel at the time Ezekiel wrote these words would seem to have no force whatever in view of the fact that quite a number of the most cher ished heroes of the people of Israel,— distinguished for wisdom or valour— won their spurs in their youthful days, and were awarded highest honour as young men by their contemporaries. So it was in the case for example of Joseph, of Samuel, of David, and of Solomon. The people of Israel had ever been ready to honour youthful genius. And why not? From East to West—in ancient times or now—does not the world belong to the young ? When Napoleon Bonaparte—in the year 1800—was elected by the French nation First Consul of France, he was only 30 years of age. And when in the same year he made his daring march across the Alps, and won the glorious battle of Marengo—what Frenchman would have thought it strange to place the name of Bonaparte —glittering in its young glory—beside the famous names of Caesar and of Marlborough? And it was just when Daniel was in the full sunshine of his fame for righteousness, fidelity to his God, and
ing on. In the year 167, however, when the revolt had been smouldering for only a year, the aged Mattathias, father of the Maccabaean brothers, died. His dying address to his sons— as given in 1 Maccabees 2 :49-68— shows an intimate acquaintance with the events and persons contained in the Book of Daniel. After referring to Abraham, Joseph, Phinees, Jesus, Caleb, David, and Elias;—he goes on to say;—“Ananias, Azarias, Mishael, by believing were saved out of the flame; Daniel for his innocency was delivered from the mouth of lions.” The Critics strenuously affirm that that address is not historical, but is merely put into the lips of Mattathias by the writer of 1 Maccabees. That may be so, or it may not. At any rate the writer of 1 Maccabees seems to have written about Ananias, Azarias, Mishael and Daniel in the same mat ter-of-course way as he did about Abraham, Joseph, and the other wor thies of the Old Testament. With regard to the personality of the prophet Daniel himself we are not dependent on any vague tradition. We have the plain and emphatic testimony of the prophet Ezekiel—his contempo rary. In the former of the two chap ters of Ezekiel from which I have taken my text we have Daniel named in two of the verses and referred to in two more;—“Though these three men Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it,”— and in the 28th chapter and 3rd verse the prophet says ironically to the Prince of Tyrus, “Behold thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee.” The genuine character of the pas sages inEzekiel is undisputed—and the dates assigned to each by the Critics is respectively 594 and 588 B.C. Now although Dr. Driver admits— rather grudgingly—that the contents of the Book rest on “a traditional basis,” nevertheless he does not seem
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs