Daniel Commentary Recommendations

I wasn't about to point to you something that's not under contract yet but because you said Premill. all I could think of is

http://www.logos.com/product/10050/classic-commentaries-and-studies-on-daniel which Im sure would have some.Or maybe not...I might be think Pre-Trib. I get those mixed up.[:@]

Joshua G said:

While this commentary adheres to premillennial dispensationalism it is very good: New American Commentary: Daniel

I've just read this one. It was clearly written and easy to follow compared to the other commentary that I was reading. It says what it has to say without getting bogged down in the arguments.

There are some places where the author's preconceptions seem to lead to the conclusions without really providing arguments that take me with him. A lot of the footnotes refer to secondary works rather than the original documents, and a few of them I couldn't track down exactly what he was referring to in a primary document. However, this makes for an easy-going commentary for the educated reader but without overwhelming detail. It can probably be classed as pastoral.

Hey Devin!

   When taking a break from doing your Literary Commentary on Ruth [:D] you could find out who from the MTS faculty teaches Dan-Rev and ask for a personal reference from his syllabus bibliography.

 

Lynden Williams said:

See if you can get a hold Uriah's Smith book on Daniel.

Please be aware that all SDA commentaries on Daniel (including that of Mr. Smith) use the year 1844 as the foundation for interpreting the prophecy. All dates and numbers must point to 1844 in their eyes. Research investigative judgment, the sanctuary doctrine, the prophet, E.G.White, etc. Not reliable resources, in my view.

 

Joshua G said:

Whoa...I just did a quick search on Seventh Day Adventist eschatology. The idea that Jesus entered a second phase of His redemptive work on October 22, 1844 is unsettling to me. Good catch Andy.

Their prophet Supported several different fallacies concerning the 1844, sanctuary, investigative judgment  debacle. The organization is locked into defending those doctrines....or they undermine the credibility of their prophet. They first predicted Christ's return on that date. When that didn't happen, The story eventually evolved into the cleansing of the Heavenly Temple...And Christ entering the Most Holy Place to begin an investigative judgment.

My Bible tells me that Christ completed his work of atonement On The Cross, [:)] He joined the Father on the throne at His ascension, And that the Judgment occurs after Christ's return.

Lynden Williams said:

Andy and Joshua, he asked for books on Daniel that approached it from a historical premillenium perspective.

The title of the thread is "Daniel Commentary Recommendations." I simply recommended that he be aware of the basis of SDA prophecy interpretation.

Andy Tucker said:

Please be aware that all SDA commentaries on Daniel (including that of Mr. Smith) use the year 1844 as the foundation for interpreting the prophecy.

I think it's unfair  to say that All SDAs hold this view. For instance, Raymond Cottrell did not. From Wikipedia:

Raymond Forrest Cottrell (April 21, 1911, Los Angeles, California– January 12, 2003, Calimesa, California) was a respected Adventist theologian, missionary, teacher, writer and editor. He was an associate editor of both the Adventist Review (the church's official news magazine) and the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary. Raymond Cottrell, is seen by some as a "progressive Adventist", as he disagreed with certain traditional positions of the church, including the investigative judgment.

Below is a link to a paper he wrote discussing the inaccuracies surrounding the organization's interpretation of Daniel.

http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/1844rc.htm

The article begins:

The traditional interpretation of Daniel 8:14 with its sanctuary and investigative judgment, which gave birth to Seventh-day Adventism and accounts for its existence as a distinct entity within Christendom, has been the object of more criticism and debate, by both Adventists and non-Adventists, than all other facets of its belief system combined. 

Ralph Hale said:

Andy Tucker said:

Please be aware that all SDA commentaries on Daniel (including that of Mr. Smith) use the year 1844 as the foundation for interpreting the prophecy.

I think it's unfair  to say that All SDAs hold this view. For instance, Raymond Cottrell did not. From Wikipedia:

Raymond Forrest Cottrell (April 21, 1911, Los Angeles, California– January 12, 2003, Calimesa, California) was a respected Adventist theologian, missionary, teacher, writer and editor. He was an associate editor of both the Adventist Review (the church's official news magazine) and the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary. Raymond Cottrell, is seen by some as a "progressive Adventist", as he disagreed with certain traditional positions of the church, including the investigative judgment.

Below is a link to a paper he wrote discussing the inaccuracies surrounding the organization's interpretation of Daniel.

http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/1844rc.htm

The article begins:

The traditional interpretation of Daniel 8:14 with its sanctuary and investigative judgment, which gave birth to Seventh-day Adventism and accounts for its existence as a distinct entity within Christendom, has been the object of more criticism and debate, by both Adventists and non-Adventists, than all other facets of its belief system combined. 

I stand corrected. I took the time to read the paper. Mr Cottrell did a wonderful job of analyzing the controversial, prophetic passages in Daniel. He was a lifelong SDA who dedicated 17 years of his life studying those passages in the original languages. At the end of all that, He had to admit that the SDA organization's interpretation runs counter to Scripture. He also recounts events where others attempted to get the SDAs to scrap their unsupportable doctrines. Those men were disfellowshipped for their efforts. It's all in the paper....An enlightening read. I highly recommend it.

http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/1844rc.htm

Do you feel someone in this thread has been abusive ?

No, NOT in this thread but perhaps we can save it for some other threads? 

Did find his closing remarks interesting: respect the other side even when your intent is to rip them to up - something we might want to remember when they turn on the debating section

[[It is a LONG report [nearly 40 pages] and so far I have just scanned it [Thanks to the person who posted it for yet another 2 month study I need to do]  Have not found the Froom papers on line but I don't think I will need to research that part of the report - and Yes, it would be nice to have the ship load of shipping containers version of Logos when researching interesting 'stuff' (From some other thread on 'Logos 5')]]

Ralph Hale said:

No Sir, That is not a LONG  report. Desmond Ford penned a LONG report , in preparation for the Glacier View Sanctuary Review Committee meeting in 1980...some 900 pages. If you are interested in this subject, It helps to know his theology. An SDA seminary student prepared a Reader's Digest version

If that summary is true to Ford’s writings then I can cross Ford off my list of ones that I need to examine.

On page two there is a table that is called an outline

1.             We are judged individually as we accept or reject Christ
2.             Only the wicked are judged, not the righteous

Number one implies that all are judged – some, the ones that accept Christ, are found not guilty or at least acquitted.

Number two clearly states that those that accept Christ are not judged – not even to be found not guilty or acquitted.

That does not compute! Contradictory statements! One says we all are - the other that only most are.

Good night Mr. Ford.  Just saved myself the years it takes to deeply study a 900 page report by reading two lines of the summary.

David Ames said:

Ralph Hale said:

No Sir, That is not a LONG  report. Desmond Ford penned a LONG report , in preparation for the Glacier View Sanctuary Review Committee meeting in 1980...some 900 pages. If you are interested in this subject, It helps to know his theology. An SDA seminary student prepared a Reader's Digest version

 If that summary is true to Ford’s writings then I can cross Ford off my list of ones that I need to examine.

Good night Mr. Ford.  Just saved myself the years it takes to deeply study a 900 page report by reading two lines of the summary.

Re: Desmond Ford
The other link took us to an Official SDA site [the group that kicked him out] and they might not be a fair judge of Mr. Ford.  At [http://spectrummagazine.org/files/archive/archive11-15/11-2ford.pdf] I found his own words – Paragraph ten shows that Ford believes it [the Investigative judgment] but states that it cannot be proved directly from Scripture.  And he gets kicked out. How many ‘other heretics’ got ‘executed’ over semantics?  [(Numbers) are to pages in his 900 page report] - I now have a better opinion of Mr. Ford.

The concept of an investigative judgment was proposed about 13 years after Adventists had adopted the idea of a heavenly sanctuary; it was not an original part of that concept (293). The Bible does not teach an investigative judgment as we proclaim it (651). Thus, I believe that "our use of sanctuary imagery to support the investigative judgment concept has been faulty" (651). It is a metaphorical concept that points to reality but is not reality itself (624). Ellen White's description of it is not stated in literal terms (626). In Daniel, judgment has to do with unbelievers, not believers (355ff). However, I agree that "Seventh-day Adventists have been right in seeing the theme of judgment in Daniel 8:14" (367), for "the fact that Scripture clearly teaches two resurrections with only the righteous coming up in the first, demands that their destiny be settled prior to Christ's coming, for they are released from the house of death with immortal bodies" (650). I further affirm that "at every point in His intercession, Christ knows whether professed believers are truly abiding in Him" (477), that "the professed Christian must stand before the judgment bar of God" (476), and that men are being judged now (523).

[[Sorry for taking so long to reply but investigations take time. [especially when you are tiring to find truth on the Internet]  He 'truly' believes what his Church teaches [as stated above] and he still gets kicked out - fun.]]

 

I just finished a study of Daniel and I used the several that are avalible in Logos.

Daniel: An Expository Commentary by H. A. Ironside

Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation by John F. Walvoord

The Footsteps of the Messiah: A Study of the Sequence of Prophetic Events by Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum

The Prophecy Knowledge Handbook by John F. Walvoord

Ernest Lucas' commentary on Daniel was great! 

"This series seeks to do the same (ably apply understanding of past events to contemporary society), keeping one foot firmly planted in the universe of the original text and the other in that of the target audience, which consists of preachers, teachers and students of the Bible."

Great format for what your searching for.  

http://www.amazon.com/Daniel-Apollos-Old-Testament-Commentary/dp/0830825193/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1333326364&sr=8-2