Daniel 7:1 — Word Study

the highest ordinary division of time. Two years were known to, and apparently used by, the Hebrews. A year of 360 days appears to have been in use in Noah’s time. The year used by the Hebrews from the time of the exodus may: be said to have been then instituted, since a current month, Abib, on the 14th day of which the first Passover was kept, was then made the first month of the year. The essential characteristics of this year can be clearly determined, though we cannot fix those of any single year. It was essentially solar for the offering of productions of the earth, first-fruits, harvest produce and ingathered fruits, was fixed to certain days of the year, two of which were in the periods of great feasts, the third itself a feast reckoned from one of the former days. But it is certain that the months were lunar, each commencing with a new moon. There must therefore have been some…

The Hebrews always had years of twelve months. But at the beginning, as some suppose, they were solar years of twelve months, each month having thirty days, excepting the twelfth, which had thirty-five days. We see, by the enumeration of the days of the deluge, Ge 7:1-8:22, that the original year consisted of three hundred and sixtyfive days. It is supposed that they had an intercalary month at the end of one hundred and twenty years, at which time the beginning of their year would be out of its place full thirty days. Subsequently, however, and throughout the history of the Jews, the year was wholly lunar, having alternately a full month of thirty days, and a defective month of twenty-nine days, thus completing their year in three hundred and fifty-four days. To accommodate this lunar year to the solar year, (365 days, 5 hours, 48…

bel-shaz'-ar (belsha'tstsar; Baltasar, Babylonian Bel-shar-usur): According to Da 5:30, he was the Chaldean king under whom Babylon was taken by Darius the Mede. The Babylonian monuments speak a number of times of a Bel-shar-usur who was the "firstborn son, the offspring of the heart of" Nabunaid, the last king of the Babylonian empire, that had been founded by Nabopolassar, the father of Nebuchadnezzar, at the time of the death of Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria, in 626 BC. There is no doubt that this Belshazzar is the same as the Belshazzar of Dnl. It is not necessary to suppose that Belshazzar was at any time king of the Babylonian empire in the sense that Nebuchadnezzar and Nabunaid were. It is probable, as M. Pognon argues, that a son of Nabunaid, called Nabunaid after his father, was king of Babylon, or Babylonian king, in Harran…

Belshazzar

Bel protect the king!, the last of the kings of Babylon (Dan. 5:1). He was the son of Nabonidus by Nitocris, who was the daughter of Nebuchadnezzar and the widow of Nergal-sharezer. When still young he made a great feast to a thousand of his lords, and when heated with wine sent for the sacred vessels his “father” (Dan. 5:2), or grandfather, Nebuchadnezzar had carried away from the temple in Jerusalem, and he and his princes drank out of them. In the midst of their mad revelry a hand was seen by the king tracing on the wall the announcement of God’s judgment, which that night fell upon him. At the instance of the queen (i.e., his mother) Daniel was brought in, and he interpreted the writing. That night the kingdom of the Chaldeans came to an end, and the king was slain (

ov:

(1) In Anglo-Saxon, had the meaning "from," "away from" (as the strengthened form "off" has still), and was not used for genitive or possessive relations, these being expressed by special case-forms. In the Norman period, however, "of" was taken to represent the French de (a use well developed by the time of Chaucer), and in the Elizabethan period both senses of "of" were in common use. But after about 1600 the later force of the word became predominant, and in the earlier sense (which is now practically obsolete) it was replaced by other prepositions. In consequence the King James Version (and in some cases the Revised Version (British and American)) contains many uses of "of" that are no longer familiar--most of them, to be sure, causing no difficulty, but there still being a few responsible for real obscurities.

Babylon

The Greek form of BABEL; Semitic form Babilu, meaning “The Gate of God.” In the Assyrian tablets it means “The city of the dispersion of the tribes.” The monumental list of its kings reaches back to B.C. 2300, and includes Khammurabi, or Amraphel (q.v.), the contemporary of Abraham. It stood on the Euphrates, about 200 miles above its junction with the Tigris, which flowed through its midst and divided it into two almost equal parts. The Elamites invaded Chaldea (i.e., Lower Mesopotamia, or Shinar, and Upper Mesopotamia, or Accad, now combined into one) and held it in subjection. At length Khammu-rabi delivered it from the foreign yoke, and founded the new empire of Chaldea (q.v.), making Babylon the capital of the united kingdom. This city gradually grew in extent and grandeur, but in process of time it became subject to Assyria. On the fall of Nineveh (B.C. 606) it threw off…

1. A celebrated city situated on the Euphrates, the original foundation of which is described under the word Babel. Wit this coincide many ancient traditions, while some speak of Semiramis as the founder, and others of Nebuchadnezzar. These accounts may all be reconciled, by supposing that Semiramis rebuilt the ancient city, and the Nebuchadnezzar. These accounts may all be reconciled, by supposing that Semiramis rebuilt the ancient city, and that Nebuchadnezzar afterwards greatly enlarged and adorned it.

Babylon lay in a vast and fertile plain watered by the Euphrates, with flowed through the city. Its walls are described as 60 miles in circumference, 300 feet high, and 75 feet wide, Jer 51:44- 58. A deep trench ran parallel with the walls. In each of the four sides were 25 brazen gates, from which roads crossed to the opposite…

Daniel

God is my judge, or judge of God. (1.) David’s second son, “born unto him in Hebron, of Abigail the Carmelitess” (1 Chr. 3:1). He is called also Chileab (2 Sam. 3:3).

(2.) One of the four great prophets, although he is not once spoken of in the Old Testament as a prophet. His life and prophecies are recorded in the Book of Daniel. He was descended from one of the noble families of Judah (Dan. 1:3), and was probably born in Jerusalem about B.C. 623, during the reign of Josiah. At the first deportation of the Jews by Nebuchadnezzar (the kingdom of Israel had come to an end nearly a century before), or immediately after his victory over the Egyptians at the second battle of Carchemish, in the fourth year of the reign of…

(judgment of God). The second son of David, by Abigail the Carmelitess. (1 Chronicles 3:1) In (2 Samuel 3:3) he is called Chileab. (B.C. about 1051.) The fourth of ’the greater prophets." Nothing is known of his parentage or family. He appears, however, to have been of royal or noble descent, (Daniel 1:3) and to have possessed considerable personal endowments. (Daniel 1:4) He was taken to Babylon in "the third year of Jehoiakim" (B.C. 604), and trained for the king’s service. He was divinely supported in his resolve to abstain from the "king’s meat" for fear of defilement. (Daniel 1:8-16) At the close of his three years…

1. Called Belteshazzar by the Chaldeans, a prophet descended from the royal family of David, who was carried captive to Babylon, when very young, in the fourth year of Jehoiakim king of Judah, B. C. 606. He was chosen, with his three companions, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, to reside at Nebuchadnezzar’s court, where he received a suitable education, and made great progress in all the sciences of the Chaldeans, but declined to pollute himself by eating provisions from the king’s table, which would often be ceremonially unclean to a Jew, or defiled by some connection with idol-worship. At the end of their three years’ education, Daniel and his companions excelled all others, and received honorable appointments in the royal service. Here Daniel soon displayed his prophetic gifts in interpreting a dream of Nebuchadnezzar, by whom he was made governor of Babylon, and head of the learned…

The orientals, and in particular the Jews, greatly regarded dreams, and applied for their interpretation to those who undertook to explain them. We see the antiquity of this custom in the history of Pharaoh’s butler and baker, Ge 40:1-23; and Pharaoh himself and Nebuchadnezzar are also instances. God expressly forbade his people to observe dreams, and to consult explainers of them. He condemned to death all who pretended to have prophetic dreams, even though what they foretold came to pass, if they had any tendency to promote idolatry, De 13:1-3. But they were not forbidden, when they thought they had a significant dream, to address the prophets of the Lord, or the high priest in his ephod, to have it explained. The Lord frequently made known his will in dreams, and enabled…

ov:

(1) In Anglo-Saxon, had the meaning "from," "away from" (as the strengthened form "off" has still), and was not used for genitive or possessive relations, these being expressed by special case-forms. In the Norman period, however, "of" was taken to represent the French de (a use well developed by the time of Chaucer), and in the Elizabethan period both senses of "of" were in common use. But after about 1600 the later force of the word became predominant, and in the earlier sense (which is now practically obsolete) it was replaced by other prepositions. In consequence the King James Version (and in some cases the Revised Version (British and American)) contains many uses of "of" that are no longer familiar--most of them, to be sure, causing no difficulty, but there still being a few responsible for real obscurities.

On

Light; the sun, (Gen. 41:45, 50), the great seat of sun-worship, called also Bethshemesh (Jer. 43:13) and Aven (Ezek. 30:17), stood on the east bank of the Nile, a few miles north of Memphis, and near Cairo, in the north-east. The Vulgate and the LXX. Versions have “Heliopolis” (“city of the sun”) instead of On in Genesis and of Aven in Ezekiel. The “city of destruction” Isaiah speaks of (19:18, marg. “of Heres;” Heb. ‘Ir-ha-heres, which some MSS. read Ir-ha-heres, i.e., “city of the sun”) may be the name given to On, the prophecy being that the time will come when that city which was known as the “city of the sun-god” shall become the “city of destruction” of the sun-god, i.e., when idolatry shall cease, and the worship…

(abode or city of the sun), a town of lower Egypt, called BETH-SHEMESH in (Jeremiah 43:13) On is better known under its Greek name Heliopolis. It was situated on the east side of the Pelusiac branch of the Nile, just below the point of the Delta, and about twenty miles northeast of Memphis. The chief object of worship at Heliopolis was the sun, whose temple, described by Strabo, is now only represented by the single beautiful obelisk, of red granite so feet 2 inches high above the pedestal which has stood for more than 4000 years, having been erected by Usirtesen, the second king of the twelfth dynasty. Heliopolis was anciently famous for its learning, and Eudoxus and Plato studied under its priests. The first mention of this place in the Bible is in the history of Joseph, to whom we read Pharaoh gave "to wife Asenath the daughter…

The orientals, and in particular the Jews, greatly regarded dreams, and applied for their interpretation to those who undertook to explain them. We see the antiquity of this custom in the history of Pharaoh’s butler and baker, Ge 40:1-23; and Pharaoh himself and Nebuchadnezzar are also instances. God expressly forbade his people to observe dreams, and to consult explainers of them. He condemned to death all who pretended to have prophetic dreams, even though what they foretold came to pass, if they had any tendency to promote idolatry, De 13:1-3. But they were not forbidden, when they thought they had a significant dream, to address the prophets of the Lord, or the high priest in his ephod, to have it explained. The Lord frequently made known his will in dreams, and enabled…

ov:

(1) In Anglo-Saxon, had the meaning "from," "away from" (as the strengthened form "off" has still), and was not used for genitive or possessive relations, these being expressed by special case-forms. In the Norman period, however, "of" was taken to represent the French de (a use well developed by the time of Chaucer), and in the Elizabethan period both senses of "of" were in common use. But after about 1600 the later force of the word became predominant, and in the earlier sense (which is now practically obsolete) it was replaced by other prepositions. In consequence the King James Version (and in some cases the Revised Version (British and American)) contains many uses of "of" that are no longer familiar--most of them, to be sure, causing no difficulty, but there still being a few responsible for real obscurities.