MIQRA Institute of Biblical Stud

Sepharim 'al ha-miqra’: Books about the Scriptures (Daniel)
______________________________________________________________________________________

Goldingay, J. E. Daniel. WBC. Word, 1989 (351 pp.). Toward the end of his preface G warns, ‘I cannot promise that one hears the Scriptures speak without that close [working with the text]’ (x). Daniel is certainly a book which elicits such a warning, and the WBC format affords G the venue to heed it, which he does. After noting that as an Isaiah scholar, he is an interesting choice for Daniel (though perhaps if you can write a book on Isaiah—G has written five—you can work on anything), he offers a detailed and well-researched reading, with plenty of textual/linguistic discussion (as one might expect from a book which contains both difficult Hebrew and Aramaic). There is also decent engagement with Jewish interpretation, and with the book’s proximity and similarity to apocryphal writing.

Gowan, D. E. Daniel. Abingdon. Abingdon, 2001 (172 pp.). Much shorter and far less technical than Goldingay’s, above, G’s more readable commentary still manages to touch down on all the major interpretive issues in Daniel scholarship (genre, authorship, the dating of the writing relative to the events it discusses, language). There is also plenty of literary “analysis,” exegetical “analysis,” and theological (and even ethical) “analysis,” but the reader will have to decide whether the level of engagement warrants the repetition of this heading. Whatever the answer, the quality of what is written is worth the read, especially for a small group or Sunday school setting.

Lucas, E. C. Daniel. Apollos. InterVarsity, 2002 (359 pp.). While readers may find Goldingay (above) and perhaps Steinmann (below) more thorough as regards the introductory material and bibliographical breadth, L’s commentary works carefully with the final form of the text, which has brought prophecy and wisdom traditions together into one whole. There is thus not a lot of interaction with questions of history or dating or authorship, nor is there much in the way of contemporary application (perhaps surprisingly, given the trendiness of this component). What readers get instead is a focused emphasis on the meaning of the text itself, from which theological reflection and formulation may be pursued.

Seow, C. L. Daniel. Westminster. WJK, 2003 (198 pp.). Though it is perhaps the easiest read here (quite close to Gowan’s, above), this shouldn’t be misleading. S does solid interpretive work, and the wisdom literature is his forte. Significantly shorter than Lucas, it still manages to offer what Lucas doesn’t: more attention to the way Daniel comes to bear on the Christian life (all the more impressive since the Westminster format also includes the text of the book prior to each commentary section). However, you won’t find this extra attention in separate “application” sections or headings. S has instead written the commentary in such a way as to embed it in his engagement with the story of the book itself.

Steinmann, A. E. Daniel. CC. Concordia, 2008 (628 pp.). This being the other of the two more technical commentaries reviewed here, after the comments above about Goldingay’s contribution, one might think there is nowhere to go with S’s additional 277 pages. The question is whether S has offered anything substantial beyond Goldingay. The textual margins themselves are the same, though the lines are clearly packed more tightly in Goldingay’s WBC volume. Moreover, the font in the textual notes sections in the WBC format is significantly reduced. Are there actually 277 more pages? Perhaps the main difference between these two is the extent to which S’s commentary is pursued in a way which bears directly on the good news of the kingdom of God announced and brought by Jesus of Nazareth. The book of Daniel, for S, is always at some level about Jesus.