Input pp. 442-455 then Select

Intertextual use of Isaiah

Scholarship increasingly recognises intertextual correspondence between Daniel and Isaiah; particularly the relationship between prophecy (e.g. Isaiah) and apocalypse (e.g. Daniel). Ronald Hendel observes that, “The reason for the identity of the categories of prophet and apocalyptic seer is that the books of the Latter Prophets came to be read in the post-exilic period in what we would call an eschatological or apocalyptic manner. They were read as veiled or esoteric revelations of divine mysteries, including the prediction of events that would occur in the distant future, relative to the prophet, meaning in the reader’s imminent future”.[1] Daniel’s use of Isaiah is not accidental.[2] The Seer employs Isaiah because the pre-exilic fulfilment in the Assyrian incursions is mirrored by the post-exilic Syrian persecutions perpetrated during the Maccabean era. Not only does the enemy come from the same geographical region (Assyria/Syria) but the enemy (Sennacherib/Antiochus) shares the same characteristics; arrogantly challenging the Holy one of Israel. Moreover, in both periods religious and political integration was achieved by corrupting the sanctuary and    Continued  ˃

[1] Ronald Hendel, Isaiah and the Transition from Prophecy to Apocalyptic, in Birkat Shalom: Studies in the Bible, Ancient Near Eastern Literature, and Postbiblical Judaism Presented to Shalom M. Paul on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday,(eds., Cohen, Chaim, Victor Avigdor, Hurowitz, Avi Hurvitz, Yochanan Muffs, Baruch J. Schwartz, and Jeffrey Tigay,Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns,2008), 262-263

[2] Hendel (2008:263) notes, “The textualization of prophecy and the complexity of the prophetic books facilitated this interpretive shift. The most striking case is the book of Isaiah, which presents the prophet as seer of the distant future. If one thinks of the author of the book of Isaiah (to take the most extreme example) as the prophet of that name who lived in the days of Hezekiah, then one is bound to conclude that he had an interest not only in eighth century Judah but in the affairs of many nations down into the Persian or even the Hellenistic period”.

the priesthood; a policy common to both Assyria and Syria.  Correct understanding of the importance of intertextual correspondence between Isaiah and Daniel is often hindered by defective contextualisation of the original Isaiah prophecies. Furthermore, critical scholarship tends to focus on intertextuality in Daniel chs.8-12 (which, admittedly constitute the majority) and this seems to lend support to the view that the Seer lived during the Maccabean persecution and saw those events as the realisation of the ancient Isaiah prophecies.  However, intertextuality, echoes and allusions to Isaiah are also encountered in earlier chapters.

Isaiah in Daniel 1-6

The book of Daniel contains allusions, echoes and Intertextual links with Isaiah.[3] Sometimes we can speak of “literary prophecy”[4] combined with midrashic elements. Daniel’s polemicizing against idolatry and divination is similar to that of Isaiah.  John Collins observes that Isaiah scoffs at the claims of the wise men of the foreign nations to save by means of divining and foretelling the future (Isa. 47:12-13; 44:25). This failure is due to the fact that the idols of the nations have no power or wisdom (Isa. 44:9-20); therefore they cannot do what Yahweh can do (Isa. 40:12-15, 23-24). [5] The refusal to conform to Babylonian religious    Continued  ˃

[3] See the comparison table: Daniel 1-6 and Isaiah at the end of the chapter

[4] Hendel remarks (2008:265); “Once it is a literary text, the prophetic oracle is to some degree unmoored from its historical context, so that prophecy relating to one set of historical circumstances came to be adapted to apply to others. As the prophetic word becomes, at least potentially, a floating signifier, it can be reconceived in correlation with other circumstances and other prophetic oracles: One scripture could be interpreted with the aid of  another scripture, and it was evidently not long before scribal interpretation gave rise to harmonizations, supplementations, and even more intricate literary connections”.

[5] J. Collins, Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel, (Scholars Press, 1977), 45

practices saw the captives emerge unscathed from the “fire” of Babylonian exile (Dan. 3:27) in a story that contains midrashic elements from Isa. 43:2. The arrogance of the Assyrian king in Isaiah 10 is not only characteristic of the “little horn” in the latter half of Daniel, but is also typical of Nebuchadnezzar in the earlier chapters. The characterization diverges because unlike the “little horn”, Nebuchadnezzar acknowledges divine sovereignty when he is humbled by God. Echoes from Isaiah 28 underpin the fall of Babylon; the drunken feast of Belshazzar is reminiscent of the “drunkards of Ephraim” and their pride and mockery reflects Belshazzar’s sacrilege and pride. The “stone” of Isa. 28:16 is proleptic of the expected eschatological intervention (Dan. 2:34), which was typified by the supernatural defeat of Assyria in the time of Hezekiah.  The resurrection of the nation in the time of Hezekiah (Isa. 66:2) after the near death experience of the Assyrian invasion finds parallels with the emergence of Daniel from the lion’s den. Darius’ acknowledgement of the God of Israel reflects gentile participation in the birth of a new nation. The Jewish Diaspora would “declare my glory among the Gentiles” (Isa 66:19).[6]  Interestingly, it is Darius who issues a decree to “tremble (tre,montaj Dan (TH) 6:27) and fear before the God of Daniel” (cf. Isa 66:2, 5 LXX tre,monta). Darius, the gentile king, “mourns” for Daniel and expresses “joy” at his deliverance and therefore by extension at the deliverance of Jerusalem (cf. Isa 66:10).  The God of Israel will not shut [7] [the womb] at the moment of birth (Isa. 66:9), but He will shut the lion’s mouth and deliver from the pit. The Assyrian lion had its mouth stopped in the time of Hezekiah (cf. Isa. 38:13-18), so also the    Continued  ˃

[6] Isaianic references to captives are supported by the Assyrian policy of deporting conquered populations (one that was emulated by the Babylonians) to newly acquired Assyrian territories; the Taylor Prism has Sennacherib remove some 200,000 captives. Some prisoners were no doubt released when the Assyrian army was destroyed outside Jerusalem during the reign of Hezekiah.  Others formed a Diaspora among the gentiles until they were joined by Babylonian deportees (such as Daniel) a hundred (plus) years later.

[7] Isa 66:9 Hebrew, עצר (close up); Daniel 6:22/23 Aramaic, סגר (shut); Theodotion, ἐνέφραξεν (block up).

Babylonian lion (Dan. 7:4) with the consequence that the nation did not perish in exile. The “son of man” vision is one of the most enigmatic and therefore one of the most debated in the OT.  Although attempts have been made to link the victorious “son of man” with the “suffering servant” of Isaiah they have generally proved to be unsuccessful. However, it is the incorrect contextualization of the “Servant Songs” (and their accompanying Psalms), that lies at the root of the failure to understand the “son of man” vision in Daniel.

Isaiah and Daniel 8-12

In an earlier chapter, correspondence was noted between Daniel 8 and the messianic oracle in Isaiah 9.  The character of the protagonist in Daniel 8 is the antithesis of messiah - the anti-Christ of the OT.

The context in Isaiah is Assyrian aggression which culminated in the invasion by Sennacherib (cf. Isaiah ch. 14). It is fitting that the Assyrian Sennacherib is employed as a template for the Syrian Antiochus. For the Danielic author the Syrian corruption of the priesthood and desecration of the Sanctuary (under Antiochus) was but a repeat of earlier abuses encouraged by Assyria (2 Kgs. 16:10-16). John Goldingay   notes other links between Daniel ch.8 and Isaiah; “The mythic language of Isa 14 is given precision by the more literal laments in Isa 59:1-15; 63:7-64:11[12]. Here already truth has fallen in the public squares and cannot be found (59:14-15 cf. Dan 8:12), and God’s sanctuary is trampled down by Israel’s adversaries (63:15, 18 cf. Dan 8:11, 13). In the context of these parallels, that between the three occurrences of פשע in Isa 59:12, 13 and the two in Dan 8:12, 13 may not be coincidental; nor may that between the description of Jerusalem as a desolation (שממה) in Isa 64:9 [10] and mention of the desolating    Continued  ˃

rebellion (הפשע שמם) in Dan 8:13. Isa 63:9 also pictures Israel looked after by Yahweh’s personal aide, whose position may be analogous to that of the leader of the army in Dan 8:11. Earlier, Isa 52:14; 53:12 provides terms (רבים ,עצומים ,שחת) that appear in Dan 8:24-25 (Brownlee, BASOR 132 [1953] 13)”. [8]  The oracle in Daniel 9 continues the thematic, Goldingay (1989:232,233) observes that, “Isa 10:22-23[9] declares that שוטף צדקה ׃ ...כי כלה ונחרצה(“justice is in full flood. Yes, an end which has been decreed [is the Lord……bringing about….]”). Each word recurs in Dan 9:24-27; the second phrase appears in the identical form in v 27, apparently indicating that the consummation which is now effected is that of which Isaiah spoke. The allusive הגביר (“[?]prevail”: see n.27.a) might also have its background in the אל גבור“God the champion” of Isa 10:21 (Kline, Law and Prophets, 466-67). Brownlee (BASOR 132 [1953] 13-14) suggests links between Dan 9 and Isa 52:13-53:12. The most    Continued  ˃

[8] John E. Goldingay, Daniel, (Word Biblical Commentary, ed., D.A. Hubbard, G.W. Barker, J.D.W. Watts, R.P. Martin; Nelson Reference & Electronic, 1989), 202-203

[9] The influence of Isaiah on Daniel is not simply uni-directional. According to Seeligmann the Greek translation of Daniel is older than the Greek translation of Isaiah, in this case the reverse is true – the translation of Isaiah into Greek was influenced by Daniel: “In the famous passage containing Daniel’s announcement to Balthasar concerning the end of the power of Babylon, the passage συντέτμηται καὶ συντετέλεσται ἡ βασιλεία σου – Dan. 5.27/28 – cannot, of course, be reckoned to be a translation of פריסת מלכוחך, but only as a consciously introduced quotation from Is. 10.22/23: λόγον γὰρ συντελῶν καὶ συντέμνων, ὅτι λόγον συντετμημένον ποιήσει ὁ θεὸς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ ὅλῃ. The phrase συντελεῖν καὶ συντέμνειν. in the Isaiah text is based on the Hebrew words כלה ונחרצה it is quoted as such in Dan.9.27, but is translated differently in the Septuagint…” Isac Leo Seeligmann, Septuagint Version of Isaiah & Cognate Studies, (eds. Robert Hanhart, Hermann Spieckermann, J.C.B. Mohr (P. Siebeck), 2004), 229

plausible are in 52:14:  שחת ,רבים ,שמם (1 QIsa^a משח!)”. In his commentary on Daniel, Collins’s links the following citations from Daniel 12 with precursor texts in Isaiah:[10]

[10] R. Hendel (2008:269,270) has culled (and translated) these references from  Collins commentary on Daniel: J. J. Collins, Daniel  (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993)

Daniel P. Bailey notes that,[11] “The language of ‘awakening’ from the sleep of death in Daniel 12:2 is apparently borrowed directly from Isaiah 26:19: ‘Awake (הָקִיצוּ) and shout for joy, you dwellers in the dust!’ (MT). But while this echo has been recognised by scholars both ancient (Jerome)[12] and modern,[13] there remains a question about the underlying text. As M. Hengel has rightly noted, the verbal parallel is closer if we assume that the text of Isaiah 26:19 read by the author of Daniel contained not the “hiphil imperative הָקִיצוּ preserved in the MT, but the imperfect הָקִיצוּ attested in 1QIsa^a”[14]

On the last visions in Daniel chapters 10-12 Goldingay (1989:284) adds the following; “More generally, the vision takes up aspects of the Book of Isaiah that may have seemed enigmatic in the light of events; the seer seeks, receives, and relates illumination on what these texts now signify. Thus he begins in 10:1 from Isa 40:1-11, with its key references to conflict/servitude (v 2), to the reliability of God’s message (v 8), and to something being revealed (v 5); and with the vision’s setting in the reign of Cyrus, compare Isa 45:1 (Lacocque). In the body of the revelation we can see the influence of earlier passages from Isaiah concerning the Assyrians, upon which Dan 11 is an actualizing commentary in the manner of the Qumran literature (Seeligmann, VTSup 1[1953] 171). Allusions to armies flooding through the land (vv 10, 22, 26, 40) recall Isa 8:7-8. The characterisation of the last northern    Continued  ˃

[11] Daniel P. Bailey, The Intertextual Relationship of Daniel 12:2 and Isaiah 26:19:Evidence from Qumran and the Greek Versions, (Tyndale Bulletin 51.2 (2000) 305-308),305

[12] Cf. J.F.A. Sawyer, The Fifth Gospel: Isaiah in the History of Christianity, (Cambridge: CUP, 1996), 186-87.

[13] E.g. J.J. Collins, Daniel, Hermeneia; (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 392.

[14] M. Hengel, ‘Zur Wirkungsgeschichte von Jes 53 in vorchristlicher Zeit’, in Der leidende Gottesknecht: Jesaja 53 und seine Wirkungsgeschichte, ed. B. Janowski and P. Stuhlmacher (FAT 14; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1996), 60

king (vv 36-37) recalls that of the Assyrian in Isaiah 10, especially vv 5-6, 12, 15 (cf.33:10), while the desolations that are determined (v 36) reflect Isa 10:22-23, 25 (cf. 28:22). See also Isa 17:22 (cf. v 10), 30:18 (cf.12:12); 34:17(cf.11:39; 12:13). Phrases from servant passages in Isa 40-55 appear at several points. Clearest are allusions to Isa 52:13-53:12 in 12:1-4: the role of the wise (המשכילים, cf. Isa 52:13 ישכיל); their setting the multitude right (cf. 53:11); also perhaps their shinning like stars (cf. 53:11 1QIsa^a; Cavallin, SEA37-38 [1972-73] 51); and the increase in… (“suffering” [see n.12:4b], cf. Isa 53:11; Allen, Vox Evangelica 1 [1962] 28).  See also 10:8, the seer’s face has been disfigured (משחית, cf. Isa 52:14); 11:12 (נשא and ירום, cf. Isa 52:13); and 11:22, 28, 30, 32 for the use of “covenant” to refer to people (cf.  Isa 42:6; 49:8) (Brownlee, BASOR 132 [1953] 12).”

Conclusion

The line between prophecy and apocalypse is often blurred; the book of Daniel did not appear ex-nihlo but from within a tradition that saw the deliverance of Judah in the time of Hezekiah as an apocalyptic eschatological event, in the same manner as the Passover deliverance from Egypt became an archetype.  The book of Isaiah exercised an important influence on the composition of Daniel – interestingly, the favour was returned when Isaiah was translated into Greek – demonstrating a symbiotic link between the two books.  From a critical point of view it might be argued that Isaiah was employed because of the geographical/political similarities between Assyria and Syria, thus reinforcing a late Antiochene date for the book; but this cannot be maintained in the light of the allusions and echoes from Isaiah that can be detected in earlier chapters, as they refer to Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar. This points towards unity of thought if not composition.  The influence of the book of Isaiah has important implications for correctly understanding the “son of man” vision in Daniel chapter 7.