The Three Additions to Daniel, a Study Part 13

Chrysostom and St. Augustine will be found under 'Early Christian Literature,' p. 167. Susanna's trouble may be taken as a conspicuous ill.u.s.tration of Ps. x.x.xiv. 19.

Susanna was conscientious as well as pure; would not lie, being tenderly nurtured morally as well as physically.[58] She had the virtue of bodily cleanliness as well as social purity, and affords an early instance of the use of the prepared bath.

It is noticeable, too, that no unfavourable traits develop themselves on the re-establishment of her happiness and the condemnation of her slanderers; there is no excessive reaction to unbecoming laxity, no ?s???? p???a.

In the character of the _Elders_ we see judicial position and feigned piety used as a cloak for l.u.s.t and slander; great hardness of heart in condemning Susanna to death, with the full knowledge that she was innocent; unblus.h.i.+ng effrontery (v. 50); sins of the tongue in 'lying and slandering.'

Hooker (_Ecc. Pol._ V. 2) refers, according to the marginal note (though they are not named in the text), to these Elders as examples of "affected atheism," "where the windows of the soul are of very set purpose closed"; "they turned away their mind and cast down their eyes, that they might not see heaven nor remember just judgments." St.

Hippolytus on v. 61 quotes Prov. xxvi. 27 very appositely. The fall of the Elders shews the need for our Lord's order in St. Matt. v. 28, and the terrible results of acting otherwise.

The individual character of each Elder has a little light thrown upon it by the form of condemnation framed by Daniel. That of the first is chiefly based on his unjust judgment, that of the second on his lewd conduct, each judgment being varied in this way according to the form of his previous iniquities. The knowledge which Daniel possessed of these appropriately determined the cast of his sentence. That he had some acquaintance with their former habits is shewn by vv.. 52, 53, 56.

The change to the plural in v. 57 is difficult to explain, and does not receive attention at the hands of the commentators; in fact Ball applies this verse, without mentioning the change of number, to the one Elder only. Although these G.o.dless judges failed in accomplis.h.i.+ng their purpose, they were not on this account less scandalous betrayers of virtue.

In Susanna's _Servants_ we see fidelity, sympathy, and no eagerness to believe an ill report. As regards Susanna, this fact speaks volumes for the excellence of her conduct.

In _Daniel_ we see the courage and penetrating ac.u.men which are so characteristic of his whole career, impressing all with whom he was brought into contact. He weighs a matter carefully before coming to a decision. By unmasking hypocrisy and securing justice he is delighted to set right a grievous wrong.[59] He appears as the best judge (_cf._ the estimation shewn of the justice of G.o.d by Azarias, Song of the Three, 4--8). Daniel further exhibits a decision and an absence of self-distrust, in undertaking tasks of great risk, quite in accordance with his character as portrayed in the canonical book, and in Bel and the Dragon. In each case he is alert, acute, and fearless; his conduct in different circ.u.mstances is quite in keeping with itself. Using his talents thoroughly, he makes "full proof of his ministry."

There is a strong resemblance in ideas, though not much in words, between Daniel's sentence in v. 55 and St. Matt. xxiv. 51. The judgment of Daniel in this case may be taken as a type of the Last Judgment, correcting the unjust judgments of this world.

A high value is set on Scripture, as v. 53 shews, where it is quoted as an authoritative rule of conduct; v. 5, too, if it is to be regarded as a reference to Jer. xxix. 23, points to a similar high esteem for it as the word of the Lord. Susanna herself in v. 22 evidently remembers David's words in II. Sam. xxiv. 14, when he too had to make his choice between falling into the hand of the Lord or the hand of man, thus shewing her ready knowledge of the O.T.

Much admirable moral teaching therefore may be drawn from the characters of this little work of world-wide interest, teaching which is needed in all nations and in all periods.

PART IV

THE HISTORY OF BEL AND THE DRAGON

THE HISTORY OF BEL AND THE DRAGON.

a.n.a.lYSIS.

v.

1, 2. Introduces Cyrus and Daniel.

3. How Bel was wors.h.i.+pped by the Babylonians.

4--7. Discussion as to Bel's wors.h.i.+p[60] between the King and Daniel.

8, 9. The King enquires of Bel's priests, and says that they or Daniel must die.

10--14. The test agreed upon to prove whether Bel partook of the offerings or no.

15--22. Decided in the negative by discovery of the Priests' trick, who are slain and their idol destroyed.

23. Introduces the other object of wors.h.i.+p[60], the Dragon.

24--27. Conversation as to its divinity between the King and Daniel, who, with the former's permission, ingeniously slays it.

28, 29. Anger of the Babylonians with them both.

30--32. They cause Daniel to be cast into the lions' den.

33--40. He is miraculously saved by Habakkuk.

40, 42. The King acknowledges the Lord, sets Daniel free, and delivers his persecutors to the fate intended for the prophet.

[Endnote: N.B.--It is unaccountable why the 'heading' in A.V. _begins_ with v. 19. _Cf._ Sus. for a similar peculiarity.]

t.i.tLE AND POSITION.

t.i.tLE.

??? ?a? ?????? is the usual t.i.tle of this booklet. It is obviously derived from the names of the two idols destroyed in the two portions of the story. But Cod. Chis. has the curious heading, ?? p??f?te?a?

?a??? ???? ??s?? ?? t?? f???? ?e?? (_cf._ v. 33). The Syriac also has the equivalent of this. In some Syriac MSS. 'Dragon' is given as a separate t.i.tle before v. 23; and Luther's version, at the same point, expands this into 'von Drachen zu Babel.'

In Codd. A, Q, the entire piece is headed ??as?? ??, and is thus treated as an integral part of Daniel, finis.h.i.+ng the book, the 12th chapter of which ends in Cod. A with ??as?? ?a?.[61] In B it follows, if possible, still more closely, there being no intermediate heading[62], In Cod. A, at the end, there is t???? ?a?. p??f?t??, which, except in the case of Ruth, is not A's usual way of terminating works. The Arabic Version in Walton also superscribes it as a 'vision' (Scholz, p. 139).

The t.i.tle 'the book of the little Daniel' seems applied to Bel and the Dragon in a Nestorian list mentioned by Churton (p. 389), and seemingly in Ebed Jesu's list of Hippolytus' works (_D.C..B_ art. _Hippolytus_, III. p. 104a). This t.i.tle, which usually belongs to Susanna, when applied to Bel and the Dragon, must refer, not to Daniel's age, but to the size of the book. Delitzsch (_op. cit._ 25_n_) mentions, without further description, one MS. from Mount Athos which ent.i.tles it pe?? t??

?a???.

The source of the marginal reading of A.V. "Bel's Dragon" (also given in the t.i.tle to Susanna) does not appear to be identified.

POSITION.

As to the place of this piece in some of the Greek MSS. _see_ above.

Professor A. Scholz (_Judith und Bel und der Drache,_ Wurzburg, 1896, p.

200) finds fault with Holmes and Parsons for having disturbed the position of this book without offering sufficient indication of having done so: "die Stucke willkurlich versetzt sind."

In the Vulgate it is reckoned as chap. xiv. of Daniel, coming after Susanna, which forms chap. xiii., as also in the Hexaplar Syriac. Caj.

Bugati, in his edition of this text, regards its ascription to Habakkuk as a reason for its detached position at the end (_see_ 'Authors.h.i.+p,' p.

186).

J. Furst's idea (quoted by Bissell, p. 444), that the work was originally incorporated in chap. vi., seems far less likely than his conjecture with regard to the position of Susanna (_q.v._). Indeed, except for a certain similarity in the lions' den miracle, it is not easy to see why it should be joined to any part of chap. vi. Nor do the similar points of the den incidents seem any real ground for making one story follow directly upon the other.