CTJ41 (2006): 17-52 Preaching Old Testament Apocalyptic to a New Testament Church1 Daniel I. Block Introduction The organizers of this conference are to be commended for responding to the widespread interest on this continent in things eschatological. Popular fas- cination with the subject is evident not only from television broadcasts such as the Jack Van Impe program but especially in the face of the phenomenal suc- cess of the Left Behind series of fictional writings. To date, more than 60,000,000 copies of these books have been sold, leading the book review edi- tors at Timeto comment that these are “the best-selling fiction books of our time—right up there with Tom Clancy and Stephen King.”2In a brand new book, God and Power: Counter-Apocalyptic Journeys(Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005), Catherine Keller argues that American responses to the current national, inter- national, and religious situation represent the deeply fraught legacy of Christian apocalypticism. She observes that although they do not understand the complex legacy of apocalypticism, both left and right religious and politi- cal factions interpret the present situation in apocalyptic terms. After analyzing the book of Revelation and wrestling with its conflicting political and religious meanings, as an appropriate response to the current climate Keller advocates acounter-apocalyptic “anti-imperial political theology of love.” The questions the organizers of this conference have asked us to address are extremely important: How do preachers and teachers address a culture in which the Left Behind books arebestsellers and apocalyptic is associated more with movies than with Scripture? How should pastors interpret and teach the apocalyptic texts of the Bible? I admit that the way I answer these questions today is radically different from the way I would have answered them forty years ago, not only because in 1965 I would not have known much about the subject, but especially because my perspective has changed. I grew up in the home of a 1This article was presented as a paper at the third annual Bible and Ministry Conference at Calvin Theological Seminary, Grand Rapids, Michigan, on June 9-11, 2005. The general theme of the conference was Preaching Apocalyptic Texts. 2As quoted on the Tyndale House Publishers web site, http://www.tyndale.com/products/ details.asp(isbn=1-4143-0540-0. 17 CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL minister who was heavily influenced by the notes in the Scofield Reference Bible and the writings of dispensationalist authors. I will never forget one of the last conversations I had with my father before he passed on to his eternal reward. The conversation concerned the book of Ezekiel, which of course interested him primarily because of this prophet’s predictions of future events. He was somewhat disappointed with some of my interpretations but was never anything other than congenial in these conversations. One day, as I was leaving, Isaid to him, “You know what, Dad? You will know the answers to all of these questions long before I do.” I trust that in the presence of God he has found the perfect answers to all our questions about apocalyptic issues. If one does not buy into this system of interpretation as a whole, how does one preach Old Testament apocalyptic texts to New Testament Christians? In answering these questions, we should first establish what we mean by Old Testament apocalyptic, then decide which texts fit our definitions, and finally wrestle with those that fit. The aim of this article is to address all of these ques- tions, though the last one will represent the center of gravity. What Do We Mean by Old Testament Apocalyptic? Scholars have long debated the meaning and scope of the term apocalyptic.3 Although the Old Greek version of the Hebrew Bible employs various forms of the verb avpokalup, tein,“to uncover, to reveal,” more than fifty times, the noun avpoka,luyij, “revelation,” occurs only once.4 As an expression for a literary genre, avpoka,luyij is found only in the New Testament, and that only once, in Revelation 1:1: “The revelationof Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John” (ESV). If one uses this verse to define apocalyptic, the word refers to “revelatory literature of the same sort as the Revelation of John.”5 According to this understanding, Daniel 7-12 and parts of Zechariah represent the only Old Testament books that might qualify as apocalyptic. Scholars are seldom satisfied with definitions as simple as this. In 1978, under the leadership of John J. Collins, the foremost academic apocalypticist,6 the Apocalypse Group of the SBL Genres Project formulated a comprehensive definition of apocalyptic genre: 3For a helpful survey of the history of the study of apocalyptic writings see J. N. Oswalt, “Recent Studies in Old Testament Apocalyptic,” in The Face of the Old Testament: A Survey of Contemporary Approaches,ed. D. W. Baker and B. T. Arnold (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999), 369-90. 4In 1 Sam. 20:30 the Old Greek reads Hebrew ‘erwâ,“nakedness, uncovering,” as avpoka,luyewj. 5 Thus R. Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 344. 6By apocalypticistwe mean one who has distinguished himself or herself as an expertin the nature, forms, and intentions of apocalyptic writings. The expression is not used of adherents to apocalypticism, on which see below. 18 PREACHING OLD TESTAMENT APOCALYPTIC TO A NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH “‘Apocalypse’ is a genre of revelatory literature with a narrative framework, in which revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being to a human recip- ient, disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal, insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation, and spatial insofar as it involves another supernatural world.”7 This definition may be helpful for understanding intertestamental writings of this genre, but it does not account for all of the book of Daniel, nor the seg- ments of Zechariah that sound suspiciously apocalyptic. Convinced that this definition left out several important elements, David Hellholm suggests the fol- lowing clause should be added to this definition: “ . . . intended for a group in crisis with the purpose of exhortation and/or consolation by means of a divine authority.”8 Paul Hanson has argued that apocalypse as a literary genre should be dis- tinguished from apocalyptic eschatology as a religious perspective and apoca- lypticism as a socioreligious movement.9Israelite apocalyptic eschatologyhas its roots in Israelite prophecy. However, whereas prophecy tended to anticipate the resolution of current social and religious problems in terms of Yahweh’s historical fulfillment of his ancient promises, apocalyptic eschatology looks for- ward to the direct intervention of a transcendent God in human affairs, who destroys the existing order and creates a new heavens and a new earth (Isa. 65:17).10This perspective may be found outside expressly apocalyptic literary genres.11On the other hand, according to Hanson, apocalypticismrefers to a social and religious movement in which adherents perceive life through the apocalyptic eschatological lens. In the past, it has been argued that such move- ments sprout and flourish among groups who feel powerless and alienated 7As cited by J. J. Collins, “Introduction: Towards the Morphology of a Genre,” in Apocalypse: The Morphology of a Genre,ed. J. J. Collins, Semeia 14 (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979), 9. 8D. Hellholm, “The Problem of Apocalyptic Genreand the Apocalypse of John,” in Early Christian Apocalypticism: Genre and Social Setting,ed. A. Yarbro Collins, Semeia 36 (Decatur, Ga, Scholars Press, 1986), 27. 9P.D. Hanson, “Apocalypticism,” in The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, Supplementary Volume,ed. K. Crim (Nashville: Abingdon, 1976), 28-34. For further discussion of the nature of apocalyptic see idem, Old Testament Apocalyptic,Interpreting Biblical Texts (Nashville: Abingdon, 1987), 25-43. 10This view of apocalyptic is represented especially by W. Schmithals, who summarizes his con- clusions in The Apocalyptic Movement: Introduction and Interpretation,trans. J. E. Steely (Nashville: Abingdon, 1975), 88, as follows: “Apocalyptic thinks historically in principle, . . . but it despairs of history itself . . . . In the apocalypticist’s conviction that he stands at the end of history there is expressed therefore the hopeful, joyous assurance that history is coming to an end—an attitude utterly impossible for the Old Testament.” 11Hanson (Old Testament Apocalyptic,73-130) treats in order Isaiah 59, 66, 24-25, 34-35, 65:17-25, Zechariah 14, Daniel 7 and 9. In his recent work on the subject, Stephen L. Cook (The Apocalyptic LiteratureInterpreting Biblical Texts [Nashville: Abingdon, 2003], 91-123), discusses apocalyptic texts found in Ezekiel, Zechariah, Joel, Isaiah, and Malachi. 19 CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL from institutional structures. These groups respond to this alienation by con- structing alternative symbolic universes in which the deity ensures the ultimate triumph of the group.12 However, recently Stephen L. Cook has noted that such movements (which he calls millennialism) may also arise within groups in power and may be spear- headed by influential figures.13He suggests that Ezekiel, Zechariah, and Joel were written by Zadokites, apocalyptic texts in Isaiah originated with Aaronides, and Malachi comes from the Levitical tribe of priests.14 The truth is it is extremely difficult to define apocalyptic.Taking into account the entire book of Daniel, the pseudepigraphic book of 1 Enoch, and the New Testament book of Revelation, Beckwith defines apocalypticsimply as “literature containing visions or dreams in which God reveals the secrets of his sovereign purpose for the future of his own people and the whole world, expressed under symbols.”15However, this definition is not as helpful as it first appears. On the one hand, this would put the accounts of Pharaoh’s dreams in Genesis 41 within the category of apocalyptic, which few are willing to do. On the other hand, it seems to exclude texts such as those found in Daniel 9-12, which gen- erally lack the symbolism of other apocalyptic texts. Because our attempts to define apocalyptic appear suspiciously circular, perhaps we should give up try- ing to define the genre and be satisfied with describing it. It is generally agreed that apocalyptic texts tend to share a series of common features: 1. Temporal dualism: the distinction of the present age from the age to come. 2. Pessimism regarding the present and optimism concerning the future. The solution to the problems of the present age is found in the hope of a new future order. 3. The periodization of history. The division of history into eons/segments (usually four, but also seven or twelve) reflects the predetermined divine plan. 4. The imminent arrival of the reign of God. The divine intervention will spell the doom of existing earthly powers. 5. A cosmic perspective. The events of the future are not focused on an indi- vidual, or the nation of Israel, or the people of God, but arecosmic in scope. 6. The vindication of the righteous. In the futureorder,which will involve a restoration of Edenic conditions, the righteous will be vindicated and the wicked condemned. 12Hanson, “Apocalyptic,” 30-31. 13Apocalyptic Literature,79-87. For a fuller discussion of the social location of apocalyptic move- ments see idem, Prophecy and Apocalypticism: The Postexilic Social Setting(Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995), 19-84. 14Ibid, 93. 15Ibid. 20 PREACHING OLD TESTAMENT APOCALYPTIC TO A NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH 7. The involvement of supernatural beings. Angels and demons are involved not only in the revelation of the future, but are actively engaged in eschato- logical events. 8. A messianic element. God designates a royal figure as a symbol and execu- tor of his rule.16 These categories may be helpful for a general understanding of apocalyptic as a genre, but when we interpret specific texts, we should be careful not to impose on those compositions perspectives that are foreign to the texts them- selves or force them to reveal elements that are not actually there. How Shall We Preach the Message of Daniel? Although we could all gain a great deal by exploring how these features are developed in all the Old Testament texts that exhibit apocalyptic features,17the remainder of this article will consider only the primary exemplar of Old Testament apocalyptic—the book of Daniel.18 The specific question we ask here is: How shall we preach the book of Daniel? Perhaps a more important prior question is: How shall we read the book of Daniel? Unless we read it cor- rectly, we can scarcely expect to preach it correctly. I propose to address the question by considering a series of issues we should consider if we would under- stand this book. When we have established the principles that should govern our interpretation of the book of Daniel, we will be in a better position to understand how to proclaim its message today. Stephen L. Cook has rightly acknowledged that the process of interpreting the book of Daniel is fraught with the danger of domesticating what is incredi- bly profound literature and robbing it of its ability to speak on their own terms.19This illicit domestication occurs in three dimensions, each of which is expressed in polar opposite forms: (1) through overly symbolic or overly spiri- 16This list represents an adaptation of the features cited by D. E. Aune, “Apocalypticism,” in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters,ed. G. F. Hawthorne and R. P. Martin (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 27; idem, “Apocalypticism,” in Dictionaryof New Testament Backgrounds,ed. C. A. Evans and S. E. Porter (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 48. Compare the features of apocalyp- tic isolated by K. Koch (The Rediscovery of Apocalyptic,trans. M. Kohl; Studies in Biblical Theology, 2nd series 22 [Naperville, Ill.: Alec R. Allenson, 1972], 24-28): (1) lengthy discourse cycles, (2)anticipation of spiritual turmoil, (3) paraenetic discourses, (4) pseudonymity, (5) mythical images rich in symbolism, (4) composite and complex literary history. 17For helpful discussion of Old Testament apocalyptic texts see Cook, Apocalyptic Literature, 91-147. He discusses in order Ezekiel 31, 38-39; Zechariah 1-8. 9-14; Joel; selected texts from Isaiah 40-66; Isaiah 24-27; Malachi. 18For a consideration of the Gog and Magog oracle in Ezekiel 38-39 and its relationship to apocalyptic see Daniel I. Block, “Gog and Magog in Ezekiel’s Eschatological Vision,” “The Reader Must Understand”: Eschatology in Bible and Theology,ed. K. Brower and M. Elliott (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1997), 85-116. 19Cook, Apocalyptic Literature,39-40. 21 CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL tual readings; (2) through overly futuristic or overly historicized readings; and (3) through overly credulous or overly suspicious readings.20 These bipolar options are not equally problematic for all. In the context in which I was raised, excessively symbolic, futuristic, and credulous interpretations tended to drown out the message of the book as the original audience might have heard it. The critical scholarly world tends to be plagued by excessive historicism and suspi- cion, as if specific prediction of distant events is impossible and texts such as Daniel 11 can only be ex eventureports of events that have already transpired.21 How then shall we proceed? How can we find that elusive middle way that is nei- ther too spiritual nor too symbolic; neither too futuristic nor too historicistic; neither too credulous nor too suspicious? The following represent what I con- sider to be key principles in unlocking the message of Old Testament apoca- lyptic literature, with particular reference to the book of Daniel. Respect the Genre of the Book We have already established that if there is any book in the Old Testament that fits scholars’ definitions of the apocalyptic genre, this is it. Collins agrees that the book as a whole is an apocalypse, but he subcategorizes it as historical apoca- lypse because it does not involve otherworldly journeys. He divides Daniel gener- ically into two parts, classifying chapters 1-6 as “tales” and chapters 7-12 as “visions.”22Collins reflects the consensus of modern critical scholarship when he declares suspiciously that “the stories about Daniel and his friends are legendary in character, and the hero himself most probably never existed.”23 John Goldingay adopts a slightly more conservative position when he opines, “The sto- ries reflect historical experiences and events. But they are not historiography.”24 Dothe facts that the book contains supposedly “legendary” features and that its aim to edify necessarily remove it from the realm of historiography? If they do, and if the book was written in the second century B.C., as critical scholars 20Ibid, 39-61. 21 Michael Fox (Character and Ideology in the Book of Esther[Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1991], 148) gives classic expression to the suspicion that pervades much of critical scholarship when he writes, “Indeed the willingness notto take a text at face value is the essence of critical scholarship.” 22J. J. Collins, Daniel with an Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature,Forms of Old Testament Literature 20 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 27-39; idem, Daniel,Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 38-61. 23Ibid., 1. 24According to John E. Goldingay (Daniel,WBC 30 [Dallas: Word, 1989], 320-34), elements such as the portrait of Nebuchadnezzar, the existence of a Median Darius, and the sandwiching of aMedian empire between the Babylonian and Persian empires differ from the historical realities as we know them may suggest that these stories may be failed efforts at history.Moresignificantly, the positive romantic and legendaryfeatures point to a genre that combines fictional and histori- cal elements with the intention of recounting an edifying story. 22 PREACHING OLD TESTAMENT APOCALYPTIC TO A NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH insist, it is remarkable how quickly the early readers of this document were duped. While there is clear extrabiblical evidence that the book of Daniel was circulating as a revered text by the second, if not the first, half of the second century,25there is also strong evidence that in the immediate centuries that fol- lowed the book it was accepted as a reliable historical source.26This early use of the book forces us to inquire concerning the book’s self-portraiture. Onfirst sight, scholars’ division of the book into two parts, corresponding to the tales (chapters 1-6) and visions (chapters 7-12) of Daniel, seems to reflect the distinctive way the first half treats the character Daniel and his three friends. Chapters 1-6 are cast as third person biographical accounts, the use of the first person being restricted to embedded speeches of the characters.27However, this pattern continues in chapter 7, though the bulk of the chapter is taken up with Daniel’s first person report of his dream (vv. 2-28). Except for 10:1, which employs the third person, chapters 8-12 are cast entirely in the first person. These chapters should be classified as autobiographical narrative. Like most Hebrew historical narrative, these chapters contain extended speeches not only by Daniel but also by other characters (most notably angelic messengers), as well as embedded dream and vision reports. Furthermore, like chapters 1and 2, chapters 7-12 all begin with date notices establishing the time of the visionary events described therein.28In this respect, the book of Daniel resem- 25This is suggested by apparent allusions to texts in Daniel in the late third- to early second- century B.C.apocryphal book of Tobit and the pseudepigraphical “Book of Watchers” embedded in 1 Enoch 1-36, and the early second centuryapocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus (Wisdom of Ben Sirah), as well as the eight fragments of the book of Daniel (one of which [4QDana]dates to the late second century B.C.) found at Qumran. If the book was composed ca. 167-64 B.C., as is com- monly believed, it is remarkable that it was accepted as authoritative [canonical?] within four decades of its composition. For a discussion of the evidence for the use of Daniel in pseudepi- graphical texts see R. Beckwith, “Early Traces of the Book of Daniel,” TynB53 [2002], 75-82). 26(1) In 1 Macc. 2:59-60 (late second century B.C.) Mattathias appeals to his sons to take inspi- ration from Hananiah, Azariah, and Mishael in the furnace of Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel in the den of lions. (2) In Matt. 24:15 Jesus accepted the prediction of the “abomination of desolation” as an utterance by “Daniel the prophet.” (3) 3 Macc. 6:6-7 (first century A.D.) refers to the same events as 1 Macc. 2:59-60. (4) Josephus (late first centuryA.D.) not only relied heavily on the book of Daniel for his account of Daniel’slife (AntX), but also referred to him as “one of the greatest prophets,” who “was not only wont to prophesy future things, as did the other prophets, but he also fixed the time at which these would come to pass.” AntX§§266-68, as translated by R. Marcus in JosephusVI, Loeb Classical Library(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1937), 305-7. 27This applies to speeches of (1) the chief of the eunuchs (1:10); (2) Arioch (2:25); (3) the Chaldaeans (2:4, 7); (4) Nebuchadnezzar (2:3, 5-9, 26; 3:14-15, 24-25, 28-29; 4:2-18, 30, 34-37; (4)Belshazzar (7, 13-16); (5) Darius (6:26); (6) commissioners and satraps (6:5); (7) Daniel’s friends (1:12; 3:16-18); (8) Daniel (1:12; 2:20-24, 30, 36; 5:17; 6:22). 28Except for chapter 12, all of these chapters begin with precise date notices: chapter 1, third year of Jehoiakim of Judah; chapter 2, second year of Nebuchadnezzar; chapter 7, first year of Belshazzar; chapter 8, thirdyear of Belshazzar; chapter 9, first year of Darius son of Ahasuerus; chapter 10, thirdyear of Cyrus; chapter 11, first year of Darius the Mede. Daniel 12:1 begins with “At that time,” linking this chapter to the preceding. 23 CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL bles the books of Ezra-Nehemiah, in which date notices frequently signal begin- nings of subunits.29 These narrative features may explain why the Hebrew Bible locates Daniel among the Writings (K˘etûbîm),rather than the Prophets (N˘ebî’îm).30The Jews got it right. Daniel did not function as a professional preaching prophet like Isaiah or Amos. His official role bore a closer resemblance to that of Joseph or Nehemiah. Furthermore, the book that bears his name also exhibits striking affinities to Ezra-Nehemiah, recognized by all to be historical narrative. Accordingly, although specific principles of interpretation appropriate to the apocalyptic genre should be applied to the embedded dreams and visions (this applies equally to both halves of the book), as a whole, the book of Daniel calls for a hermeneutic not very different from the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Recognize Historical Significance of Daniel Although critical scholars tend to dismiss the historical and historiographic significance of the book of Daniel, arguing that the character Daniel was a fic- tional construct, such skepticism is unwarranted. The name Danielis attested in Ezra 8:2, where it identifies a son of Ithamar named Daniel, who served as priest at the time of Ezra and returned to Jerusalem from exile with him. Obviously this is not the character involved in the book that goes by the name. This Daniel’s name appears in two contexts in the book of Ezekiel, first as a paragon of righteousness along with Noah and Job (14:14, 20) and later as the epitome of wisdom (28:3). Although many doubt that this was the Daniel of the book of Daniel, the most natural reading identifies this figure with the charac- ter in this book.31 Having been taken to Babylon as a political hostage on Nebuchadnezzar’s first visit to Jerusalem in 604 B.C.(Dan. 1:1), apparently this 29Ezra 1:1, the first year of Cyrus king of Persia; 3:1, the seventh month; 4:6, in the reign of Artaxerxes; 7:1, “After these things, in the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia”; Neh 1:1, “In the month of Chislev, in the twentieth year”; 2:1 “In the month of Nisan, in the twentieth year of King Artaxerxes”; 9:1, “On the twenty-fourth day of this month”; 13:15, “In those days.” Similar notices date many of the oracles in Ezekiel, Haggai, and Zechariah. 30Contra Collins (Daniel[FOTL], 29) and most critical scholars who argue that Daniel had not been written by the time that the prophetic canon consisting of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and The Twelve had been closed. However, their apriorlate dating of the book demands some such con- clusion. 31For a discussion of the issues involved and a defense of the present position see Daniel I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel Chapters 1-24NICOT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 447-50. On Daniel’s place in Babylon and the historical value the book of Daniel see D. J. Wiseman, Nebuchadrezzar and Babylon,Schweich Lectures 1983 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985), 84-115. While questions regarding the date of composition of Daniel remain, many accept a sixth- century date for the stories contained in chapters 1-6. See R. G. Kratz, Translatio imperii. Untersuchungen zu den aramäischen Daniel-erzählungen und ihrem theologiegeschichtlichen Umfeld, WMANT 63 (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1991), 146-47. 24 PREACHING OLD TESTAMENT APOCALYPTIC TO A NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH young Hebrew quickly distinguished himself as a man of extraordinary virtue and faith. If the Daniel of the book was indeed a historical figure, it is inconceivable that the exiles in Ezekiel’s audience would not have been familiar with him. One may speculate that Daniel’s influence in Nebuchadnezzar’s court led not only to the king’s favorable treatment of Jehoiachin in Babylon,32but also to the settlement of the exiles in favorable circumstances at Tel Abib on the Kebar Canal (Ezek. 1:1; 3:15).33Although the exiles from Judah were shamed and humiliated by the experience of deportation, in exile they flourished so well that when Cyrus issued his decree in 539 B.C.permitting the Judaeans to return to Jerusalem, many apparently preferred not to go.34Why should the Judaeans have been settled within the vicinity of Babylon (rather than far away), be given 32Ezekiel refers to Jehoichin as a snipped off sprig of a cedar who, after a three-month reign, was carried away captive to Babylon, the “city of merchants,” along with his family and the Judaean nobility (Ezek. 17:4-5; cf. v. 12b). In contrast to the deuteronomic historian (2 Kings 24:6-17), who interpreted the deportation of this eighteen year old as punishment for following in his father’s footsteps and “doing evil in the sight of Yahweh,” Ezekiel presents the event in an entirely favorable light. Nebuchadnezzar is a benevolent king, who ensures the well-being of Jehoiachin by planting him in a well-watered seed bed, an obvious reference to the favorable treatment offered him in Babylon. According to cuneiform documents dated to Nebuchadnezzar’s thirteenth year (592 B.C.), he and his sons were the recipients of generous food rations. ANET,308. He is referred to as - [Ia]-’-ú-kinu’Ia-ku-ú-ki-nu,“king of the land of Yahud.” For the original publication, see E. Weidner, “Jojachin, König von Juda, in babylonischen Keilschrifttexten,” Mélanges Syriens offerts à Monsieur René Dussaud (Paris: Paul Geuthner,1939), 2:923-35. Although he would later fall out of favor with his host (cf. 2 Kings 25:27-29), at the time of Ezekiel’s oracle, Jehoiachin appears to have been enjoying the good will of Nebuchadnezzar, a fact of which the prophet was undoubtedly aware. Wiseman (Nebuchadrezzar,81) suggests the Babylonian king was preparing him and his fam- ily for an eventual returnto Jerusalem as loyal supporters of his regime. See further, D. I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel Chapters 1-24,NICOT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 541-42. 33For discussion of the traditional location of na-rkabari/unear Nippur, some eighty kilometers southeast of Babylon see Block, Ezekiel Chapters 1-24,84. However, the designation na-rkabari’ applied to at least three different canals. See R. Zadok, “Notes on Syro-Palestinian History, Toponomy and Anthroponymy,” UF28 (1996): 727. Furthermore, more than thirty recently dis- covered tablets written at a place called al-Yah¸u¯dah (uruia-a-h¸u-du), “the city of Judah,” which was located near Borsippa in the immediate vicinity of Babylon, arenow in the process of publication. Three have already been published by F. Joannès and A. Lemaire, “Trois tablettes cunéiformes à onomastique ouest-sémitique,” Transeuphratène 17 (1999): 17-34. For a preliminary report of the remainder see L. E. Pearce, “New Evidence for Judaeans in Babylonia,” Judah and the Judeans in the Persian Period,ed. O. Lipschits and M. Oeming (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, forthcoming). D. S. Vanderhooft discusses the significance of these texts for the location of the exiles in “Theological Perspectives on the Book of Ezekiel,” a paper read at the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literaturein San Antonio, Texas, November 21, 2004. 34For further discussion of Babylonian conditions see P. R. Ackroyd, Exile and Restoration,OTL (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968), 31-38. The documents from the Mura˘sû Archive from the last half of the fifth centuryB.C.suggest that Jews quickly got involved in mercantile and banking enter- prises. See M. W.Stolper,Entrepreneurs and Empire: The Mura˘sûArchive, the Mura˘sûFirm, and Persian Rule in Babylonia(Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1985). 25 CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL alarge tract of fertile land, and granted the level of independence necessary to maintain their own ethnic identity and social cohesion?35Daniel may have been the answer to this question. Scholars have long recognized the affinities between the stories of Joseph in Egypt in Genesis 39-50 and the story of Daniel in Babylon. Especially striking are the facts that both Joseph and Daniel were taken into captivity in a foreign land against their wills, both served as courtiers of foreign monarchs, and both distinguished themselves as men of extraordinarily high moral character and as gifted interpreters of dreams.36Remarkably, during the tenures of both men as officers of the highest positions in the land, their kinsmen joined them in the land of exile in favorable circumstances. Whereas the Genesis narrative explic- itly declares that God providentially sent Joseph ahead so he could secure the region of Goshen for them when the crisis of famine would strike (Gen. 45:4- 15; 46:28-47:12; 50:15-21), the Daniel narrative makes no such claim for Daniel. Nevertheless, while we may speculate about Nebuchadnezzar’s political moti- vation for taking Daniel and his three friends to Babylon in 604,37Daniel 1:9 and 17 expressly attribute Daniel’s rise in the Babylonian court to the provi- dential hand of God, and the narrative adds, “Daniel continued [in office] until the first year of Cyrus the king” (1:21).38The reference to “the first year of Cyrus” recalls 2 Chronicles 36:22 and Ezra 1:1, both of which note, “In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of Yahweh by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled, Yahweh stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom and also put it in writing.” We may now have solved both the riddle regarding the settling of the Judaeans in a favorable location near Babylon and the means whereby Yahweh “stirred up the spirit of Cyrus.” In the providence of God, Daniel was sent to Babylon as an advance party to prepare for the coming of the first wave of exiles in 598 B.C.Indeed, Joseph’sspeech to his brothers in Genesis 45:4-8 could eas- ily have been adapted by Daniel as follows: 35References to the exiled Jehoiachin as “the king of Judah” (2 Kings 25:27; Jer.52:31) and the institution of “elders of the people/Israel” (ziqnê ha¯‘a¯m’yis´ra¯’¯el)attest to the exiles’ community self- consciousness. This sense of ethnic cohesiveness was promoted and/or reflected in the careful keeping of family records (Ezra 2; Neh. 1) and continued communication with Jerusalem, espe- cially beforethe fall of the city (e.g., Jer. 29). Even though we have no record of a temple for Yahweh in Babylon (which contrasts with the situation in Egypt), it appears that Israelite religious institu- tions such as circumcision and the Sabbaths were maintained, at least externally. Cf. Isa. 56:2-4; 58:13; Ezekiel 44-46. 36The points of similarity extend far beyond these broad themes to specific shared expressions and phrases. See the summaries by Collins, Daniel,39-40; L. F. Hartman and A. A. di Lella, The Book of Daniel: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary,AB 23; (Garden City: Doubleday, 1977), 56. 37The date for Daniel’sdeportation according to Wiseman, Nebuchadnezzar,23. 38Cf. 6:28, which notes that Daniel enjoyed success in the reign of Cyrus the Persian. 26