Views: 24<\/p>
[Note: <\/strong>This MS is available in larger font on our Manuscripts<\/strong> page.]<\/span><\/p>\n Some Preliminary Considerations<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n To mutilate some lines from Shakespeare\u2019s Sonnet 43, \u201cBy how many names do we know thee? Let us count the names:\u201d \u201cKingism,\u201d \u201cAD 70 Theology,\u201d \u201cRealized Eschatology,\u201d \u201cPreterism,\u201d \u201cCovenant Eschatology,\u201d \u201cTransmillennialism\u201d (trademarked by its advocates in 2001), and likely others. I observed years ago (and have stated many times) that novel doctrine always requires novel terminology to communicate it, and there is no better demonstration of this fact than the foregoing list of terms.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 I wrote the following comments about \u201cRealized Eschatology\u201d several years ago:<\/span><\/p>\n This maverick movement would not be worthy of the notice I am giving it here except for two factors:<\/span><\/p>\n I caution the reader not to consider \u201cRealized Eschatology\u201d as merely a \u201cdoctrine.\u201d It is far more. It is a system of theology every bit as much as dispensational premillennialism and Calvinism are. Just as the 1,000-year <\/em>passages in Revelation 201 constitute the \u201ctail\u201d that wags the entire premillennial \u201cdog,\u201d so the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem wags the whole \u201cKingism\u201d dog. Premillennialism makes the disastrous error of perverting the highly figurative language of the book of Revelation into their subjective literal interpretations. Contrariwise, Transmillennialism perverts the literal terms concerning the fundamentals of the Second Coming, the bodily resurrection, the Judgment, and eternal Heaven and Hell into their highly subjective figurative\/spiritual meanings. These heretical systems are equally damnable in their consequences.<\/span><\/p>\n Introduction to Daniel 12<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n The final chapter of Daniel is by far the shortest of the book with only 13 verses.2<\/sup> However, it is an important chapter, if for no other reason, because it is the last and culminating chapter. a primary rule of biblical exegesis and hermeneutics is that one should not study or interpret any passage of scripture in isolation, but in both immediate and remote context. The importance of this principle is no more clearly demonstrated than in the study of Daniel 12. Indeed, this chapter is but the continuation and conclusion of the vision begun at Chapter 10, Verse 1. It is difficult to imagine the basis on which Hugo, the thirteenth century Old Testament chapter- divider, made his beginning point for chapter 12.<\/span><\/p>\n Butler is correct in observing as follows: \u201cIf the reader would disregard, momentarily, the imposed chapter and verse divisions, and read chapters 10 through 12 as one unit, he would readily observe the continuity of purpose\u201d (450). McGuiggan does not even attempt to outline or deal with chapter 12 apart from chapters 10 and 11 (157\u2013184). This faulty chapter division is especially apparent concerning 12:1\u20134. A far more logical beginning for chapter 12 would have been with our present Verse 5, leaving Verses 1\u20134 as part of chapter 11. This will be readily observable when we begin the exegesis of the text. The exposition of chapters 10 and 11 are not within the purview of this exposition. However, it will be necessary to review those chapters to some extent (especially the closing section of chapter 11) to establish the basis of our comments on chapter 12.<\/span><\/p>\n I have outlined this chapter as follows:<\/span><\/p>\n One more comment before diving into Daniel 12:<\/span><\/p>\n I freely admit that I have been unable to find any approach to this interesting, yet difficult, chapter that is free of all problems. I have chosen the one that seems most satisfying to me. There is room for others to hold a divergent view as long as said view does not involve any contradiction of truths clearly taught elsewhere in the Scriptures.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Now, let us study the text of this important chapter.<\/span><\/p>\n Exegesis and Exposition of Daniel 12:1\u201313<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Verses 1-4: The Conclusion of the Vision Concerning the Future of God\u2019s People <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Verse 1: <\/em><\/strong>\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince who standeth for the children of thy people; and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. <\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n The opening words, \u201cAnd at that time…,\u201d connect what is about to be revealed with what has just been revealed. We are made to ask, \u201cAt what time?\u201d and to find the answer we must back up into Chapter 11. The final verse (45) speaks of someone of great power who would encamp between the sea and the \u201cglorious holy mountain,\u201d but who would meet his end with no rescuer. Obviously, to know what \u201cthat time\u201d is we must determine, if possible, who this ruler was, what this encampment was, and when it occurred.<\/span><\/p>\n I remind the reader that the book of Daniel is apocalyptic in nature, meaning that it contains much imagery and various figures, signs, and symbols. However, it also gives a rather detailed panorama of the sweep of the heathen empires from Daniel\u2019s time to some future point and the way God\u2019s exiled people would relate to them and be affected by them. It is so detailed and explicit for the most part that the identities of the various empires and even rulers are generally identifiable. The principal reason for the revelation of these events was apparently to give hope to the beleaguered Jews of the captivity. As a captive, displaced people, they were all but hopeless. They wondered if God had completely forsaken them or if there was still the possibility that He would fulfill His promise of a new king of David\u2019s seed who would be given the eternal kingdom (2 Sam. 7:12\u201316; 1 Chr.17:11\u201314). The meaning of Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s dream answered this question: In the fourth empire from Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s, God would set up His kingdom, which would stand evermore (2:31\u201344).<\/span><\/p>\n In that dream and its interpretation (the kernel of the book) the first of these empires was Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s Babylon, in which Daniel lived. The second was that of the Medes and Persians, which conquered and succeeded Babylon. The third was the Grecian Empire (referred to by name <\/strong>in 8:21; 10:20; 11:2, which overwhelmed Persia) under Alexander and his successors. The fourth was the Roman Empire (which rolled over the remnants of Alexander\u2019s once-mighty domain). In the days of those kings God would (and did) set up His everlasting kingdom (I have written at some length on Dan. 2 [McClish, Daniel<\/em>, 68\u201387]). The message of the interpretation of this dream was one of marvelous hope for these downtrodden people.<\/span><\/p>\n It is important to note that the time span covered by the book of Daniel is circumscribed and limited by events related to these four empires of Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s dream, the last of which was the Roman Empire. Although those mighty world empires seemed to be all powerful and invincible at the apex of their power (with the Roman Empire the mightiest of all), as impossible as it seemed, God would still establish His kingdom which would have no successor (as indeed He did). This would finally bring the relief and security to God\u2019s people for which they yearned. The point I want to keep before us is that just as the beginning <\/strong>point of Daniel\u2019s prophecy is identified as the Babylonian Empire, the ending <\/strong>point is also identified as sometime in the Roman Empire and no later. <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n This necessary premise to understanding the book is evident on at least three other bases besides Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s dream:<\/span><\/p>\n Thus, when the Jews were finally and irretrievably broken (by the Roman Legions in AD 70), the visions of the book of Daniel would be fulfilled and finished.<\/span><\/p>\n I believe McGuiggan is right about this:<\/span><\/p>\n The scope of the book has consistently been from Babylon (at the earliest) to Rome (at the latest). See this in chapters 2 and 7. In chapter 8 we go from Persia to the Seleucids. In chapter 9 we went from Persia to Rome. In chapters 10 through 12 we do the same thing\u2014 from Persia to Rome (159).<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n If I am right in this (and I believe I am), there is not even a toe, much less a leg, left upon which the premillennialist can build a case for his mythical one-thousand-year literal future kingdom scheme. You see, the establishment of the eternal kingdom of God and the enthronement of His\/David\u2019s Son, the Messiah\/Christ, took place in the days of the Roman \u201ckings\u201d\u2014\u201cin the latter days\u201d of Daniel\u2018s people, the Jews, long since passed. In fact, this eternal kingdom (the church of Christ [Mat. 16:18\u201319]) was established in the first century of our era (McClish, Daniel <\/em>68\u201387).<\/span><\/p>\n Now, back to the antecedent of he <\/em>in 11:45: Who is this \u201che\u201d? We get no help in Verses 41\u201344, which oscillate between he <\/em>and him <\/em>several times, but with no fuller identity. Not until we get to Verse 40 do we find a more specific identity: the king of the north<\/em>. However, this is so general that we must move yet farther back in the chapter to determine who this is in order to know the time of which Daniel 12:1 speaks.<\/span><\/p>\n Note the following review of Chapter 11:1\u20136:<\/span><\/p>\n There is general agreement among expositors with these respective identities of \u201cthe king of the south\u201d and \u201cthe king of the north,\u201d through 11:35<\/strong>. More particularly, practically all exegetes identify \u201cthe king of the north\u201d in Verses 21\u201335 (some say 21\u201339) with Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the last Seleucid king. However, as indicated below, a wide variety of opinions exists concerning the kingdom\/king who is the subject of Verses 36\u201345. Since this identity bears directly and heavily upon the understanding of Chapter 12, we must give careful study to it.<\/span><\/p>\n There are perhaps a dozen diverse suggestions as to who \u201cthe king\u201d of Verse 36 might be (Antiochus Epiphanes, a Jewish Antichrist, a single (mythical) New Testament \u201cAntichrist,\u201d Antiochus and <\/strong>Antichrist [type and antitype], Herod the Great, the Roman Pope\/papal system, Mohammed, the Roman Empire, et al.). Most conservative commentators I have read apply Verses 36\u201345 to Antiochus in one way or another (e.g., Barnes 2:207, 240, Butler 434, Copeland 61, Henry 4:1106, Zerr 4:273). Barnes, attempting to avoid the difficulties involved in applying Verses 40\u201345 to Antiochus as a continuation of his exploits from Verses 36\u201339, suggests that they are a \u201crecapitulation\u201d of the material found in Verses 21\u201339 (246\u201347). At the same time, however, many of the commentators admit the serious difficulties encountered in applying these verses to him. In fact, some demonstrate that one must torture the text to do so (McGuiggan 170\u201371, Young 246\u201351).<\/span><\/p>\n Without doubt, at first glance <\/strong>Verse 36 seems <\/strong>to refer to Antiochus (the subject of the preceding verses). However, with the difficulties involved in consistently applying this and succeeding verses to him, many commentators believe some different king or government is introduced in this verse. To me, the difficulties involved in assigning a new kingdom\/king to Verses 36\u201345\u2014while not totally absent\u2014are indeed fewer than in attempting to assign them to Antiochus.<\/span><\/p>\n If this is the case, who then is the most likely ruler or empire under consideration? The answer that makes the most sense is the Roman Empire, for at least three reasons:<\/span><\/p>\n I conclude with McGuiggan: \u201cThere is nothing in the text [vv.36\u201345] which the Romans couldn\u2019t and didn\u2019t do,\u201d which he stated in an extended discussion of Verses 36\u201345, giving bases for identifying the king of the north <\/em>as the Roman Empire (170\u201372).<\/span><\/p>\n Based on our thesis thus far, let us turn our attention to Daniel 11:45, which immediately precedes Daniel 12:1. The Roman authorities are described as being in such a position of power that they can set up their standards at will, including in Judah. This I believe to be the meaning of planting \u201cthe tents of his palace between the sea [i.e., the Mediterranean] and the glorious holy mountain [Mt. Zion that housed the temple.\u201d Although the Roman power would seem invincible (as had the previous empires), Daniel was not to think it to be indestructible. The time would also come when it would perish with none to rescue it. However, this is not so much a definite prediction regarding time, but merely a reminder to help Daniel keep things in perspective.<\/span><\/p>\n At that time… <\/em>(Dan. 12:1) refers to the time when the Romans were ruling Palestine. Michael (the archangel, cf. 10:13, 21) was to stand up. His name means, \u201cWho is like God?\u201d and thus appears as the representative of God. He is described as \u201cthe great prince who standeth for the children of thy people.\u201d It was apparently his function to keep a watchful and helpful eye over God\u2019s people. Despite Michael\u2019s help, this would be a time of terrible trouble for God\u2019s people, \u201csuch as never was since there was a nation even to that same time.\u201d To what could this refer except the terrible clashes between the Jews and the Romans in the Roman occupation of Palestine that resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem as a city and of Israel\u2019s national identity in AD 70? Imagine how this sounded to Daniel, who had been through the awful trials of Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s destruction of Jerusalem. He must have had a hard time imagining times of troubles worse than those, yet that is the message he received. One cannot read this without remembering that the Lord used almost these very words to describe that self-same destruction: \u201cFor then shall be great tribulation, such as hath not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, nor ever shall be\u201d (Mat. 24:21). I believe the Messenger to Daniel and the Lord were referring to the same event.<\/span><\/p>\n God\u2019s true people would be delivered at this time of terror and tribulation. This is not speaking of the fleshly Jews, but of God\u2019s spiritual Israel through His Son\u2014Christians. When the Christ died on the cross the Old Testament\u2019 authority was slain with Him (Col. 2:14), thus ending God\u2019s covenant <\/strong>relationship with the Jews as a race of people. When God set up His eternal kingdom (the church), with His\/David\u2019s Son on its throne, the church, open to people of all the nations, became the \u201cIsrael of God\u201d (Rom. 2:28\u201329; Gal. 6:15\u201316; Phi. 3:3). The eternal kingdom (thus, the consummation of God\u2019s promise in Daniel 2:44) had been in existence for forty years when the Romans overran Jerusalem in AD 70. Those in the kingdom, not merely Jews according to the flesh, constituted God\u2018s people at the time of that great conflagration. Thus I believe those referred to here as \u201cthy people\u201d who would be delivered because they were \u201cfound written in the book\u201d were the Christians who escaped Jerusalem before it fell. Indeed, the Lord provided the very signs by which His people would be able to recognize this event and He told them to flee the city for their lives when those signs appeared (Luke 21:20\u201324; Mat. 24:15\u2013 21). The account of Josephus, the uninspired eyewitness, of the lifting of the siege against Jerusalem briefly, thus allowing every Christian in the city to escape, is well-known. This is likely what the Lord referred to in his warning passage: \u201cAnd except those days had been shortened, no flesh would have been saved: but for the elect\u2019s sake those days shall be shortened\u201d (Mat. 24:22). Compare this with the promise to Daniel that those written in the book of life would be delivered.<\/span><\/p>\n Verse 2: <\/em><\/strong>\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. <\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n A resurrection is described in Verse 2, but to what does it refer? Many, if not most, expositors believe this is a promise of and a reference to the final general resurrection when all who have lived and died shall be called forth from the tomb, either to eternal bliss or eternal shame. God\u2019s Word most certainly sets forth just such a universal bodily resurrection to precede the final universal Judgment (John 5:28\u201329; 1 Cor. 15:42\u201354; 1 The. 4:14\u201317; et al.).<\/span><\/p>\n Realized Eschatology proponents deny the straightforward Scriptural doctrine that there will be any such literal, universal, bodily resurrection of those who have died. As with the establishment of the kingdom of Christ, His glorious return, the end of the world, the Judgment, and the beginning of eternal life or death, so with the resurrection. All references to such in Scripture are figurative with only a \u201cspiritual\u201d fulfillment. Kingites aver that all of these came to a head in the one grand event of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. They thus relegate Calvary and Pentecost to secondary status compared to the AD 70 event. In the theological system of the transmillennialist, all <\/strong>unfulfilled prophecies preceding that date were fulfilled in that occasion, including the passages that promise our resurrection. To what then do the resurrection passages point? They insist that these refer to the church, which, they allege was \u201craised\u201d from the \u201cgrave\u201d of dead Judaism, and which\u2014surprise\u2014occurred in AD 70.<\/span><\/p>\n The AD 70 hobbyists are the current version of the infidel Sadducees of old, who \u201csay there is no resurrection\u201d (Acts 23:8). We say to them now, as the Lord said to them 2,000 years ago, \u201cYe do err, not knowing the scriptures…\u201d (Mat. 22:29). The Kingites are likewise the modern reincarnation of a pair of false teachers in Ephesus, concerning whom Paul wrote:<\/span><\/p>\n But shun profane babblings: for they will proceed further in ungodliness, and their word will eat as doth a gangrene: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; men who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already, <\/strong>and overthrow the faith of some (2 Tim. 3:16\u201318, emph DM).<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n The apostle would doubtless say similar words of those who teach the same deadly and foolish doctrine were he among us today. As then, so now: AD 70 theology constitutes \u201cprofane babblings\u201d and \u201cungodliness\u201d\u2014a spiritual cancer that consumes all who give heed to it. Its imbibers \u201cerr concerning the truth\u201d and its teachers \u201coverthrow the faith of some.\u201d Except to refute their errors, these men should be \u201cshunned,\u201d as were those Ephesian apostates.<\/span><\/p>\n I do not for a moment give ground to the absurd Scripture-denying error of the realized eschatology folks who \u201cspiritualize\u201d every reference to a resurrection. However, some \u201cresurrections\u201d mentioned in the Bible are figurative rather than literal. I believe the resurrection described in Daniel 12:2 is among them.<\/span><\/p>\n Rather, this resurrection has to do with the peculiar fate and future of the Jews of Daniel\u2019s time in some way, but in what way? Ezekiel was the \u201ccountry prophet,\u201d contemporary with Daniel, the \u201ccity prophet,\u201d during the first several years of the exile. His challenge, perhaps even more than Daniel\u2019s, was to give a message of hope to the hopeless and downtrodden common people among the Babylonian expatriates. Although there seemed to be no ray of light to pierce their dark present existence and anticipated future, Ezekiel\u2019s message after the final fall of Jerusalem was one of hope. \u201cThis was accomplished not only through explicit promises (28:25; 34:11f; 37:21; et al.), but through the dramatic vision of the resurrected dry bones (37:1\u2013 14)\u201d (McClish, Ezekiel <\/em>202). Could it be that both Daniel and Ezekiel <\/strong>described the ultimate revival of Israel in God\u2019s plan (i.e., restoration to Canaan, and longer range\u2014the coming of the Messiah and establishment of the eternal kingdom) in terms of a resurrection? I believe this is, in fact, the case.<\/span><\/p>\n The people of God were so forlorn under the Gentile domination of their exile that it appeared that they had died as a nation, never to rise again. Isaiah used the resurrection figure of the ungodly heathen nations: \u201cThey are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased, they shall not rise\u201d (26:14). Not so with God\u2019s chosen nation\u2014they would rise as it were from their place \u201cin the dust.\u201d It is not God\u2019s fault that the Jews incorrectly assumed that these promises referred to the establishment of an earthly political kingdom with the Messiah as their king. Tragically, literal Israel would reject and crucify the very One who came to give them the ultimate and eternal kingdom of God, even as He tried to teach them that God\u2019s eternal kingdom would be spiritual rather than political.<\/span><\/p>\n This \u201cresurrection\u201d of Daniel 12:2 occurred when the Christ came and established His everlasting spiritual <\/strong>kingdom (John 18:36, God\u2019s spiritual <\/strong>Israel, as noted above). His people were at last given perpetual independence and sovereignty, which overrides all nations and their territorial boundaries (Dan. 2:44). Thus Peter called the church God\u2019s \u201choly nation\u201d (1 Pet. 2:9). It is a great irony in the history of God\u2019s people that old fleshly Israel rejected\u2014and for several years remained the chief persecutor of\u2014God\u2019s new and true spiritual Israel. The great trouble and tribulation of Daniel 12:1 that literal Israel suffered in AD 70 was payment-in-kind in God\u2019s wrath for her rejection of the true King and His kingdom.<\/span><\/p>\n That some in this resurrection would be raised to everlasting life and some to everlasting contempt refers to the fact that some of the Jews would accept the Savior and others would reject him. Note how similar the prophecy concerning the Christ-child of the righteous and devout Simeon is to the outcome of the resurrection of Daniel 12:2: \u201cBehold, this child is set for the falling and rising of many in Israel\u201d (Luke 2:34). It is a great tragedy that only a remnant of Jews believed and obeyed the Gospel, while the great majority remained (and remain) infidels (Rom. 10:1\u20133). While I do not believe this resurrection refers to the literal one that shall finally include all men, what is said of those who are raised is true concerning it. There will be only two classes of persons in the resurrection: those raised to everlasting life and those raised to everlasting contempt (Mat. 25:31\u201346; John 5:28\u201329).<\/span><\/p>\n Verse 3: <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n And they that are wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.<\/span> <\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n \u201cThey that are wise\u201d (\u201cthose who understand,\u201d LXX) is likely a reference to those who have listened to the visions of the book of Daniel, consequently remaining faithful to God, and, if living till the time of the \u201cresurrection\u201d of Verse 2, who accepted the Christ and His spiritual kingdom. These would shine as the brightness of the heavens, a promise of their eternal bliss. A blessing is then pronounced upon \u201cthey that turn many unto righteousness.\u201d Their eternal reward is likened unto the endless shining of the stars. These words of the angel to Daniel remind us of the ultimate wisdom of hearing, obeying, and serving the Lord Jesus Christ and of helping as many as possible to walk in the same way.<\/span><\/p>\n Verse 4: <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. <\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n The angel commanded Daniel to \u201cshut up the words and seal the book.\u201d Some think this refers only to the latest vision, beginning in Chapter 10. However, I understand it to be of the whole book. Thus, I agree with Kiel: \u201cWe understand…the whole book\u201d (9:485) and with Young: \u201dEvidently Daniel had written down his revelations, as he received them. This last revelation formed a conclusion, and the entire body (i.e., the book) was now to be sealed\u201d (257). To shut up the book and seal it means that Daniel is to see that it is protected and preserved until the time of the end. This is not until the \u201cend of time,\u201d but the time of the end of the things prophesied in the book. We have seen that this refers in its extremity to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.<\/span><\/p>\n The last part of the verse is very difficult to unravel. It seems to speak of the desire on the part of many to know the events of those times embraced by and prophesied in the book, apart from which they will seek in vain. Young probably makes as much sense as anyone in his paraphrase of the entire verse: \u201cPreserve the book until the end, for it contains the truth as to the future. Many shall go to and fro in search of knowledge, but they shall not find it\u201d (258).<\/span><\/p>\n Verses 5\u20137: Two Persons (Likely Angels) Converse with the Messenger <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Verses 5-6: <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Then I, Daniel, looked, and, behold, there stood other two, the one on the brink of the river on this side, and the other on the brink of the river on that side.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n And one said to the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n After the vision which began in Chapter 10 was concluded, Daniel saw \u201cother two\u201d persons (not otherwise described, but apparently angels), one on either side of \u201cthe river.\u201d That is, these were in addition to the original Messenger of the vision. We will pause long enough to ask who this glorious Messenger was. He is identified as \u201cthe man clothed in linen,\u201d which refers to the description of the glorious and awesome one mentioned in 10:5\u20136. The appellation, \u201ca man,\u201d simply means he appeared as a man, in the form of a man, which is the common Biblical description of a Heavenly being who appears to human beings. Some have tried to identify Him with either Michael, the archangel (Jude 1:9; Rev. 12:7) or with Gabriel, another prominent angel (Luke 1:19). However, \u201cthe man in linen\u201d is distinguished from them both and is apparently their superior (Dan.10:13; 8:16). I believe the Second Member of the Godhead, the Divine Logos, the pre-incarnate Christ, is the proper identity of this One on the following grounds:<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cThe river\u201d refers to the river Hiddekel, mentioned as the location of Daniel when the last vision of the book began (10:4). This is one of the most famous rivers in the world and is the third river mentioned in the Bible, one of the four to flow out of the Garden of Eden where God placed the first man and woman (Gen. 2:10\u201315). According to Hackett, who provides a summary of the evidence for the identity, a better-known name for this river is \u201cTigris\u201d (2:1062).<\/span><\/p>\n Verse 7: <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n And I heard the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and a half; and when they have made an end of breaking in pieces the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished. <\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n One of the angels asked the original Messenger how long it would be until the consummation of the events prophesied in the vision. In Verse 7 we have the immediate response, made more solemn by the uplifting of His hands and His swearing in the presence of the Father. The response has two parts:<\/span><\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n