Daniel 2

[Darryl_B]

In Daniel 2 there is an image which has generally been interpreted as Babylon, Medes/Persians, Greeks, Romans. That is the interpretation at least as far back as Josephus who does not mention Romans per se, only alludes to them, probably because of his circumstance.

I have been entertaining the thought that the image is not actually “world-domination” but rather philosophical ideas which have been adopted by the Jews, and the “man” image is actually Israel. There were the Babylonians and they influenced the Jewish religion producing the Babylonian Talmud. The Greeks, gymnasiums etc influenced the Jewish religion. The Romans, we have no king but Caesar. It then culminates in the destruction AD70, and out of that ruin, Jesus built the Church.

I am questioning whether the image is from a foreign perspective to the Jews and an image of secular history, or whether it is an image of the Jews, and therefore their history.

 

[petra22]

good question. Hoping you get some responses…

 

[bmullins]

In Daniel 2 there is an image which has generally been interpreted as Babylon, Medes/Persians, Greeks, Romans. That is the interpretation at least as far back as Josephus who does not mention Romans per se, only alludes to them, probably because of his circumstance.

I have been entertaining the thought that the image is not actually “world-domination” but rather philosophical ideas which have been adopted by the Jews, and the “man” image is actually Israel. There were the Babylonians and they influenced the Jewish religion producing the Babylonian Talmud. The Greeks, gymnasiums etc influenced the Jewish religion. The Romans, we have no king but Caesar. It then culminates in the destruction AD70, and out of that ruin, Jesus built the Church.

I am questioning whether the image is from a foreign perspective to the Jews and an image of secular history, or whether it is an image of the Jews, and therefore their history.

I think we have to acknowledge that it was written by a Jewish writer for a Jewish audience. Even if the imagery was something that they through their intellectual faculties adapted to suit their message, it was still a Jewish message. Could they have learned these images while in their babylonian exile? Sure. The thing is all of us are influenced by that which we are exposed to. That doesn’t make it a foreign idea or change what we believe, but rather we take what is true and we examine it in light of what else we know to be true.

To understand it we would have to examine it from the perspective of a Jewish writer in exile in Babylon. Dunno if that answers what you are asking though.