Gleason Archer on Daniel

I’ve just run through another commentary on Daniel, in this case the Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Volume 7, section on Daniel, by Gleason Archer. (See my notes on this commentary.)

You can review my more detailed view in those notes, but I would simply state that this is one of two carefully conservative, scholarly commentaries on Daniel that I have read. Those who would like to preach from the book will find it particular useful. Let me list these major commentaries on Daniel in order, from most conservative to most critical.

1. Daniel, by Desmond Ford.
   This is no longer in print, but it is available from some libraries, and occasionally used. Desmond Ford was a Seventh-day Adventist scholar and he did quite a good job of summarizing the evidence from a conservative perspective. His key to interpretation is the apotelesmatic principle, suggesting multiple fulfillments for predictions.
2. Daniel and the Minor Prophets (Expositor’s Bible Commentary), by Gleason Archer.
   This is a solidly evangelical commentary. There is no give on historical or prophetic/predictive issues.
3. Daniel (Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries), by Joyce Baldwin. Conservative but with a lighter touch.
4. Daniel (Apollos Old Testament Commetnary), by Ernest Lucas
   Allows either a 6th or 2nd century date, while affirming a high view of scripture.
5. Daniel (Anchor Bible), by Hartman and Di Lella
   Affirms a 2nd century date while also affirming inerrancy.
6. Daniel (Old Testament Library), by Norman Porteous
   A good example of a fully critical commentary, though it is a bit short for my taste.

I may spend some time on literary criticism of Daniel after I present a series of entries on Isaiah 24-27 as an example of critical methologies.