11/26/21
Scholarly Reflections
Beale, G.K. "Chapter Five: The Use of Daniel in the Synoptic Eschatological Discourse and in the Book of Revelation." in Wenham, David (editor), The Jesus Tradition Outside the Gospels. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1984, 129-153.
Beale sets out to demonstrate that the eschatological developments found in Revelation are related to the midrashinc views originating in Daniel, rather than being build on Synoptic material, particularly that used in Mark 13 (Wenham [editor] 1984, 129). While Mark 13, Matthew 24, and Luke 21 appear to be derived from Daniel 7-9 and 11-12, Beale notes the similarity in content with Revelation, but considers the Synoptics to represent Jesus' interpretation of Daniel, but Revelation to represent John's interpretation of Daniel without reference to the way it is expressed in the Synoptics (Wenham [editor] 1984, 130).
Revelation chapters 4-5 have a connection to Daniel. However, Beale observes that "the few works dedicated only to studying the use of the OT in Revelation fail to give proper attention to chapters 4-5, much less to the use of Daniel therein" (Wenham [editor] 1984, 131). Because of this lack of research, Beale attempts to establish his idea that the whole of Revelation 4-5 has a strong influence from Daniel chapter seven. He therefore begins with a list of the elements of each vision, in order, providing verse references for each step of the description (Wenham [editor] 1984, 131-132). In this evaluation, Beale finds both passages have the same fourteen elements of content, with only a slight variation in their order, which he takes to be due to Revelation's expansion of some of the images (Wenham [editor] 1984, 132).
Beale does observe that Revelation 4:1-5:1 bears a very close resemblance to Ezekiel chapters 1-2. However, the order is more significantly different, and five of the elements common to Daniel and Revelation are lacking in Ezekiel (Wenham [editor] 1984, 132).
Beale further considers allusions to Daniel found in Revelation. He dos note a forthcoming book which he authored, discussing the allusions in more detail, but here he provides a compact list (Wenham [editor] 1984, 133).
Beale's conclusion is that the structure of Revelation 4-5 is directly influenced by Daniel chapte seven (Wenham [editor] 1984, 133). Counter to this opinion, Ezekiel chapter one, though it bears some similarity, is probably not a source for structure in Revelation (Wenham [editor] 1984, 134). Beale further observes that other portions have elements suggesting they serve largely as Midrash on portions of Daniel. The connections of Daniel and the overall content of the New Testament are relatively strong (Wenham [editor] 1984, 136).
Beale next provides some evidence that Revelation 1 and 13 may also beclosely related to Daniel 7 and 10. There are a number of clear allusions and the overall structure is similar (Wenham [editor] 1984, 137). Again, there has been some scholarship which points to symoptic source material. However, Beale finds the similarity to Daniel to be more persuasive (Wenham [editor] 1984, 139).
Beale's overall conclusion is that Revelation and the Synoptics tend to draw on the same body of teaching, which includes material from Daniel (Wenham [editor] 1984, 143). This is particularly true of the eschatological portions of the New Testament. Beale does not find these materials used to any significant degree in the non-eschatological portions (Wenham [editor] 1984, 144). Again, when Beale reviews allusions to the Synoptics and to Daniel in Revelation, he concludes that Revelation and the Synoptics are drawing on a common source and not on one another (Wenham [editor] 1984, 147).
Scholarly Reflections
Beale, G.K. "Chapter Five: The Use of Daniel in the Synoptic Eschatological Discourse and in the Book of Revelation." in Wenham, David (editor), The Jesus Tradition Outside the Gospels. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1984, 129-153.
Beale sets out to demonstrate that the eschatological developments found in Revelation are related to the midrashinc views originating in Daniel, rather than being build on Synoptic material, particularly that used in Mark 13 (Wenham [editor] 1984, 129). While Mark 13, Matthew 24, and Luke 21 appear to be derived from Daniel 7-9 and 11-12, Beale notes the similarity in content with Revelation, but considers the Synoptics to represent Jesus' interpretation of Daniel, but Revelation to represent John's interpretation of Daniel without reference to the way it is expressed in the Synoptics (Wenham [editor] 1984, 130).
Revelation chapters 4-5 have a connection to Daniel. However, Beale observes that "the few works dedicated only to studying the use of the OT in Revelation fail to give proper attention to chapters 4-5, much less to the use of Daniel therein" (Wenham [editor] 1984, 131). Because of this lack of research, Beale attempts to establish his idea that the whole of Revelation 4-5 has a strong influence from Daniel chapter seven. He therefore begins with a list of the elements of each vision, in order, providing verse references for each step of the description (Wenham [editor] 1984, 131-132). In this evaluation, Beale finds both passages have the same fourteen elements of content, with only a slight variation in their order, which he takes to be due to Revelation's expansion of some of the images (Wenham [editor] 1984, 132).
Beale does observe that Revelation 4:1-5:1 bears a very close resemblance to Ezekiel chapters 1-2. However, the order is more significantly different, and five of the elements common to Daniel and Revelation are lacking in Ezekiel (Wenham [editor] 1984, 132).
Beale further considers allusions to Daniel found in Revelation. He dos note a forthcoming book which he authored, discussing the allusions in more detail, but here he provides a compact list (Wenham [editor] 1984, 133).
Beale's conclusion is that the structure of Revelation 4-5 is directly influenced by Daniel chapte seven (Wenham [editor] 1984, 133). Counter to this opinion, Ezekiel chapter one, though it bears some similarity, is probably not a source for structure in Revelation (Wenham [editor] 1984, 134). Beale further observes that other portions have elements suggesting they serve largely as Midrash on portions of Daniel. The connections of Daniel and the overall content of the New Testament are relatively strong (Wenham [editor] 1984, 136).
Beale next provides some evidence that Revelation 1 and 13 may also beclosely related to Daniel 7 and 10. There are a number of clear allusions and the overall structure is similar (Wenham [editor] 1984, 137). Again, there has been some scholarship which points to symoptic source material. However, Beale finds the similarity to Daniel to be more persuasive (Wenham [editor] 1984, 139).
Beale's overall conclusion is that Revelation and the Synoptics tend to draw on the same body of teaching, which includes material from Daniel (Wenham [editor] 1984, 143). This is particularly true of the eschatological portions of the New Testament. Beale does not find these materials used to any significant degree in the non-eschatological portions (Wenham [editor] 1984, 144). Again, when Beale reviews allusions to the Synoptics and to Daniel in Revelation, he concludes that Revelation and the Synoptics are drawing on a common source and not on one another (Wenham [editor] 1984, 147).
RSS Feed