Daniel-Introduction-Interpretation of the Book of Daniel
Wenstrom Bible Ministries
Pastor-Teacher Bill Wenstrom
Wednesday November 16, 2011
Daniel: Introduction to the Book of Daniel-Interpretation of the Book of Daniel
Lesson # 5
Please turn in your Bibles to Luke 24:27.
One must adhere to sound hermeneutical principles when interpreting the book of Daniel, which contains not only narrative history but also apocalyptic language as we noted.
The rules and principles involved in interpreting the Bible is called hermeneutics.
The English word “hermeneutics” comes from the Greek verb hermeneuo and the noun hermeneia.
These words point back to the wing-footed messenger god Hermes in Grecian mythology who was responsible for transmuting what is beyond human understanding into a form that human intelligence can grasp.
He is said to have discovered language and writing and was the god of literature and eloquence, among other things.
He was the messenger or interpreter of the gods, and particularly of his father Zeus.
Thus, the verb hermeneuo came to refer to bringing someone to an understanding of something in his language (thus explanation) or in another language (thus translation).
Thus interpretation involves making clear and intelligible something that was unclear or unknown.
A compound form of this verb appears in Luke 24:27 with regards to the Lord Jesus Christ interpreting or explaining the Scriptures concerning Himself to His disciples.
Luke 24:27 Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained (diahermeneuo) to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures. (NASB95)
Adhering to sound hermeneutical principles will result in sound exegesis, which refers to the process of determining the meaning of a text of Scripture, the Word of God.
It refers to the explaining, declaring, telling, or relating of objective truth.
Exegesis precedes exposition (i.e. communicating the Word of God to the congregation).
Exposition aims to apply the text and its meaning to men and women today, enabling them to answer the question: what message has this for us, or for me, in the present situation?
Exposition must be firmly based upon exegesis: the meaning of the text for hearers today must be related to its meaning for the hearers to whom it was first addressed.
When interpreting the book of Daniel as is the case with the rest of Scripture, one must not allegorize but let the Biblical text speak for itself.
Those who allegorize are not letting the text speak for itself but are putting words into God’s mouth.
The book of Daniel, like the rest of the Scriptures must be interpreted its historical settings.
One must compare Scripture with Scripture.
Also, one must interpret literally and grammatically and not allegorize.
Proper interpretation involves paying attention to the context of a particular verse.
Not only paying attention to the immediate context but also in the context of the book it appears in and in context with the rest of Scripture.
This leads to a pretribulational and premillennial view.
The basic differences between the premillennial and amillennial and between pretribulation and posttribulation views are hermeneutical.
In other words, they are the direct result of the method one chooses to interpret Scripture.
The basic difference between an amillennialist and a premillennialist is the direct result of the method one chooses to interpret Scripture.
Those who allegorize and do not interpret the Scripture literally and specifically prophetic portions of Scripture will not be pretribulational or premillennial but will be posttribulationalists and amillennialists.
Therefore, the method one chooses to interpret the book of Daniel as is the case with the rest of Scripture, must be based upon sound hermeneutical principles.
Unsound method of interpreting Scripture leads to error in interpretation and practice and false doctrine.
The allegorical method involves interpreting a literary text which regards the literal sense as the instrument for a secondary and more spiritual profound sense.
This method either ignores or denies the historical context.
The emphasis with this method is entirely upon the secondary sense with the result that the original words of the text have little or no significance at all.
Thus, this method does not interpret Scripture but ignores the meaning of the original sense with the justification that one is seeking a deeper, spiritual meaning.
It is in error because it doesn’t interpret Scripture but puts words into God’s mouth.
It denies the authority of the Scripture.
Furthermore, this method does not provide any means at all to test the interpretation.
Thus, the allegorical method of interpreting Daniel or any portion of Scripture takes away the authority of Scripture.
It does not leave any basis upon which interpretations may be tested.
The direct antithesis of the allegorical method is the literal method of interpreting the Scripture.
The literal method gives each word the same exact basic meaning it would have in normal and customary usage whether in writing, speaking or thinking.
It is also called by some the grammatical-historical method, which emphasizes the fact that the meaning of a text is to be determined by carefully considering its grammar and syntax as well as its historical setting.
The literal method is the normal approach in all languages.
Also, parables, allegories, types and symbols depend upon the literal meaning of the terms.
The Bible makes sense when interpret literally.
Furthermore, many erroneously contend that the literal method does not take into consideration figures of speech, symbols, allegories and types but rather takes them into consideration.
This method removes the subjective and emphasizes the objective meaning that it keeps man’s imaginations imposing itself on the text and lets the text speak for itself.
Further in support of the literal method is that when the Old Testament is used by the New Testament authors under the inspiration of the Spirit it is only used in a literal sense.
For example, the prophecies concerning the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Christ were literally fulfilled two thousand years ago with the person of Jesus of Nazareth.
This tells us that the prophecies concerning His Second Advent will also be fulfilled literally.
The literal method basis itself in fact, which means that it seeks to establish itself in objective data such as grammar, logic, etymology, history, geography, archaeology, theology, etc.
All sound exegesis of a passage of Scripture must begin with the words of the text itself.
Secondly, the interpreter must pay attention to the context in which any passage appears.
Thirdly, one must interpret a passage of Scripture in its historical setting.
In the book of Daniel, we must understand that Daniel was a captive in Babylon and served under Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar and the Persian king Cyrus.
Another important consideration when interpreting Scripture is that the interpreter must understand the grammar and syntax of a passage.
Specifically he must understand the grammar and syntax of the original language of the passage.
In Daniel, the interpreter is analyzing the Hebrew and Aramaic portions of the book.
The interpreter must take into consideration figurative language.
He must have the presupposition that the word is literal unless there is strong evidence for determining otherwise.
Now, the interpreter of the book Daniel must be very careful since it contains prophetic material.
First and foremost, the interpreter must interpret prophecy literally.
He must take into consideration and analyze a passage in relation to the words it contains as well as its context, grammar, syntax and historical setting.
When interpreting prophecy such as that which appears in the book of Daniel, the interpreter must determine the historical background of the prophet and the prophecy.
He must determine the full meaning and significance of all the names, events, geographical references, references to customs and culture.
He is to determine if the passage is prophecy or didactic.
If the former, then is the verse presenting a prophecy that is fulfilled, unfulfilled or conditional.
The interpreter also must determine if the same theme or concept is addressed in another passage of Scripture.
Simultaneously, the interpreter must pay attention to the context.
He is to be aware of whether the prophecy is local or temporal.
Furthermore, prophecy must be interpreted in harmony with the rest of God’s prophetic program, which is a principle presented by Peter in 2 Peter 1:20-21.
Another important aspect of interpreting prophecy is understanding and being aware that a passage might have a double reference.
This means that in prophecy, events often bear some relationship to one another and are in fact parts of one program.
In other words, certain events of the future are seen grouped together in one defined area of vision even though they are at different distances.
For example, many times the major prophets issued prophecies concerning the Babylonian captivity, the events of the day of the Lord, the return from Babylon, the world-wide dispersion of Israel and their future return to the land and grouped them all together seemingly indiscriminately.
Connected to this when interpreting prophecy, the interpreter must observe the time relationships meaning that some events that are widely separated as to the time of their fulfillment are sometimes treated within one prophecy.
For example, the prophecies concerning the First and Second Advents of Christ are spoken of together in one pericope as though they were going to take place at the same time.
This phenomena is also seen with the second and third dispersions of the Jews, which are viewed as taking place without interruption.
So the prophet may view widely separated events as continuous or future things as either past or present.
Another important aspect of interpreting prophecy is that of understanding and being aware of the central theme of all prophecy, namely, the Lord Jesus Christ, His person and work.
To summarize, one must interpret prophecy historically, which means that the interpreter must know and understand the historical background of the prophet and the prophecy.
This will include understanding the full meaning and significance of all proper names, events, geographical references, references to customs and culture.
Connected to this is that the interpreter must interpret grammatically meaning that he must strictly observe the rules that govern grammatical interpretation.
He also must interpret according to the principle of double reference, which we noted earlier.
Finally, interpreting prophecy demands consistency applying the literal-grammatical method.
Failure to consistently apply sound hermeneutical principles results in error in one’s conclusions and interpretations, which results in false doctrine and ungodly conduct.
Consistent observance of these sound hermeneutical principles results in correct interpretation, sound doctrine and godly conduct.
