Page 302 - Daniel

Tigris as “the great river” to be a contradiction since the Euphrates is
normally called “the great river.” 13

Montgomery regards this “as an early gloss” in the text, with the only
alternative that “otherwise we must attribute a solecism or gross error to
14
the writer.” The Syriac version substitutes “Euphrates,” for “Tigris.” All
of this, however, is quite arbitrary as there is no reason why the Tigris
should not also be called a great river; and if that expression uniformly

referred to the Euphrates, it would be all the more strange for a copyist
to insert “Tigris.” Conservative scholars generally agree that the river is
15
the Tigris. The probability is that Daniel had come to this area in
connection with his duties as a chief government administrator. No great
amount of travel need be assumed because just above Babylon the
Euphrates and Tigris are only about thirty-five miles apart.

There Daniel had a vision of a glorious man, who is described in verse
5. All commentators agree that the personage was not a man, but either
a glorious angel or a theophany, that is, an appearance of God Himself.

Leupold concludes that the personage is a mighty angel on the fact that
he requires the help of Michael, mentioned in verse 13, which would not
be true of deity. If an angel, it may have been Gabriel, who appeared to
Daniel in chapter 8. However, Leupold prefers to identify him with an
unknown angel of equal stature with Michael. Young notes that
16
Hengstenberg identified him as Michael and that the Jews considered
the figure an angel. 17

Although there is room for debate, there is at least some evidence for
considering this to be a theophany. If it is, the man of 10:5–6 would

need to be distinguished from the angel of 10:10–14 as well as from
Michael, mentioned in 10:13. Although mighty angels are frequently
difficult to distinguish from God Himself, as in other visions such as
those in Ezekiel and Revelation, the similarity between the man
described in 10:5–6 and the glorified Christ (Rev. 1:13–15) has led some
conservative expositors to consider the man a genuine theophany or an
18
appearance of Christ as the Angel of Yahweh. Others, however, believe
that only an angel is in view in these verses. 19
The linen of the personage in the vision was probably the fine white

linen which characterized the priests’ garments (cf. Exod. 28:39–43). In
other instances, linen formed the clothing of heavenly visitors (cf. Ezek.