Prayer Tents Bible References - Prayer Tents

DANIEL, ADDITIONS TO

The “additions” to the MT of Daniel are various texts found in Greek versions of the book of Daniel. Supplementing the Hebrew/Aramaic text of Daniel, they “interpret” it by adding spoken texts to the narrative in Dan. 3 and by expanding the characterization of Daniel with two more stories about him. These additions represent different genres: two tales (Bel and the Serpent; Susanna), one prayer (the Prayer of Azariah), and one praise song (Song of the Three Young Men). Although a Semitic original is widely presumed for each of the texts, they are extant only in Greek versions: the Old Greek (closer to LXX) and Theodotion (returning towards the MT). Since the OG (LXX) translation probably occurred in Alexandria ca. 100 b.c.e., these texts should predate that era, yet each text may offer further hints about its provenance. The OG seems to have arranged the texts in this order: Daniel, Bel, and Susanna. Apparently, Theodotion had a different order: Susanna, Daniel, and Bel.

The stories are not very significant in Jewish tradition, so they are considered as “apocryphal” in Protestant circles, while Roman Catholics include them as deuterocanonical and Orthodox read them as part of the LXX. Jerome used the Hebrew text as the basis for his Latin translation, but he also translated these additions and noted their differences from the Hebrew in a preface; since the preface is usually omitted in later reprintings, many considered the additions an integral part of the Vulgate. Contemporary Bibles generally place the stories of Susanna and Bel as chs. 13 and 14 respectively. The translations in the NRSV and NAB basically follow the translation of Theodotion rather than the OG (LXX).

Prayer of Azariah

This prayer (3:24-45[Eng. 1-22]) and the following song (3:52-90[29-68]) follow the narrative about three young Jewish men thrown into a fiery furnace in Babylon because they had refused to revere a statue that Nebuchadnezzar had erected for that purpose. These two additions fall between 3:23 and 3:24 in the Masoretic tradition; they are joined by a prose addition (3:46-51[23-28]).

Azariah’s prayer resembles a type common in the Second Temple period, wherein a request for deliverance and vindication is set in the framework of a prayer that also contains confessions of divine justice and mercy, of human sin, descriptions of the present humiliation, a reminder of God’s covenantal promises, and a promise of contrition on the part of sinners (cf. Ezra 9:6-15; Neh. 1:5-11; 9:5-37; Dan. 9:4-19; Bar. 1:15–3:8; Ps. 106). In many ways this prayer also reminds one of Communal Lament Psalms (e.g. Pss. 44, 74, 79). An unusual feature in this prayer is the reference to “an unjust king, the most wicked in all the world” (3:32[9]); this wording may hint at Antiochus Epiphanes and the Maccabean era (similarly v. 44[21]).

This prayer fits the narrative context of Daniel awkwardly, since the predicament of the three young men occurred in spite of their apparent innocence before God; in fact, some consider their perseverance as a precursor to the martyr tradition. However, if the text comes from the Maccabean era this prayer would better fit that setting and the text of Dan. 7–12. Many scholars argue for a Semitic original, and recent commentary favors Hebrew over Aramaic as the language of composition. The prose interlude after this prayer shows no evidence of a Semitic original, so it may have been composed at the time the prayer and hymn were incorporated into Hebrew/Aramaic Daniel; then it would serve to introduce the following hymn.

Song of the Three Young Men

This song of praise to God for deliverance from the furnace resembles the genre known as hymns in recent Psalm study. It begins with six verses declaring God’s glory (“blessed are you/your name, etc.”; 3:52-57[29-34]); this resembles the introduction in Ps. 144:1. It also corresponds well with a line in the MT of Daniel where Nebuchadnezzar is led to praise the Lord after he witnessed the saving of these men: “Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who has sent his angel and delivered his servants” (3:28). The hymn continues with typical imperatives to praise (“bless the Lord”) addressed to almost all creation in the heavens and on the earth (3:58-89[35-66]); that fire and heat should praise God directly after the liberation from the fiery furnace provides an apt and ironic connection with MT Daniel. In form, this hymn resembles Pss. 136, 148. The commands to praise God in this song can be divided by content into four categories: (1) heavenly bodies (3:59-64[36-41]); (2) elements of nature (3:65-74[42-51]); (3) earth and its bodies (3:75-83[52-59]); and (4) human beings (3:83-91[60-68]). An antiphonal refrain (“sing praise to him and highly exalt him forever”) is also found in each verse, and it resembles the response found throughout Ps. 136: “for his steadfast love endures forever.” Such antiphons remind one of a worship setting.

Questions about the date of composition should also consider the way of describing the era: the temple serves as the place of worship, and no persecution of Jews is apparent. The Song of the Three Young Men has found a Christian liturgical usage in the Liturgy of the Hours, as a canticle paralleling some of the Psalms sung or recited in the office.

Susanna

This story about Daniel saving Susanna, a Babylonian Jewish woman, begins by describing the lust of two Jewish elders for the wife of their colleague and friend, Joakim (vv. 1-14). Soon they discover that each shares the same desires, so they concoct a plot to trap her into having sexual relations with them while she is bathing alone in her garden: they will threaten to accuse her of adultery with a young man in the garden if she refuses them (vv. 15-27). But she does refuse, preferring to fall into their wicked injustice than to sin in God’s eyes. So in a public trial she is charged with adultery, the sentence for which is death (vv. 28-41). Modern readers may be amazed that the two judges also give the witness against her, and that she is never allowed to speak at the trial; but she does raise her eyes to heaven, because she trusts in God. After the assembly accepts the testimony of the elders and condemns her to death, Susanna prays a loud prayer of complaint to God, who knows all, that she has been falsely accused of actions she did not commit and is about to die despite her innocence. Finally, a young man named Daniel is led by a spirit of God to try to save this innocent woman, which he accomplishes by a wily process of interrogation of the two elders, showing how they have given conflicting versions of an important detail: under what tree did this occur? As a result, Daniel convicts them of their crime (vv. 42-64). The “whole congregation” rises up against the two elders and executes them, thus saving the innocent blood of Susanna. She receives praise from her parents and husband, and Daniel rises in stature with the people from that day.

Several theological motifs grace this story. God is all-knowing Lord of the Universe, as well as Lord of history and savior of individuals who are righteous. God responds to the outcry of the oppressed (as in the Exodus). A holy spirit inhabits the young Daniel, and God’s saving activity occurs through his boldness and his investigation in the mold of a trickster. God also allows the wicked to receive as punishment what they had planned against an innocent woman, the other aspect of a saving God. This story elevates the characters of great individuals and leaves them as role models.

The story described here comes from the version of Theodotion, which differs considerably from the OG in length, amount of detail, and order of contents. The OG puts far less emphasis on Susanna as a character, focusing more on the sins of the elders. Details of her bathing are much less elaborated, nor is she the focus of the conclusion; OG, however, ends with an exhortation to search for more youths like Daniel, who will be pious and filled with knowledge and understanding (v. 62b). In the OG this story usually stands as either ch. 13 or 14. This shorter version, focusing on leadership qualities, probably served as a source for the later translation of Theodotion, which usually locates the story of Susanna before Dan. 1, , effectively introducing the pious young Jewish man before the so-called court tales in Dan. 1–6.

A Hebrew original seems the best explanation of various translation anomalies, and this is most easily understood as composed in Palestine. But the OG version, which is more oriented toward social issues and categories, is often connected with Alexandria, whereas Theodotion, with its emphasis on individual character and ethics, seems more reminiscent of the Hellenistic novella, which also emerged in Diaspora settings (parallel to the Babylonian setting of the story). A hypothesis that Theodotion’s translation was made in either Syria (Antioch) or in Asia Minor (Ephesus) better fits these qualities of the more popular translation. Recent feminist scholarship seems to explore both paths: with the focus on individuals, Susanna takes second place to Daniel (Theodotion), while analysis of gender and social roles (Susanna as woman and outsider) allows the story to present a subtle but challenging message: Susanna and Judaism are both viewed as “outsiders.” Recent study ranges over various interpretive stances, from legal analysis of the court case to the history of Christian interpretation, especially the allegorical position developed in the patristic era. Like Judith, Susanna has provided an immensely popular biblical topic for painters. Contemporary study of these paintings tends to focus on details from the more colorful Theodotion text and may shed much interpretive light on responses to this tale throughout the centuries. In the Roman Catholic lectionary the story of Susanna has traditionally been read on a Saturday in Lent.

Bel and the Serpent

Three stories about Daniel’s ridicule of Babylonian idolatry and his efforts to suppress it are joined in this addition, also known as Bel and the Dragon (or Snake). The first concerns the daily food and drink rations (sacrifices) brought to the image of Bel (Marduk) each day. The king reveres this god and questions Daniel why he does not worship Bel. Daniel responds that Bel is no god and has never eaten or drunk anything brought before the image. The king challenges 70 priests of Bel to demonstrate who actually eats the offerings. Daniel’s clever wisdom allows him to demonstrate that the food and drink are actually consumed by the priests and their families, so the king turns on them and vindicates Daniel. The second story introduces a serpent which the Babylonians revered and the king’s challenge to Daniel to deny that this was a living god. In this case Daniel demonstrates that the living serpent is not a god by feeding it a mixture which causes the serpent to burst after swallowing it; if the serpent had been divine it would not have eaten the deadly cakes. In the third story, Babylonians angry at their king for allowing a Jew to ridicule their gods force him to turn Daniel over to them, and they toss him into a lions’ den. The prophet Habakkuk is then transported by an angel to Babylon to feed Daniel, so when the king comes later to the lions’ den to mourn Daniel he finds him safe and healthy. The king then confesses the greatness of Daniel’s god (“and there is no other besides you” (v. 41) and gives Daniel’s enemies the treatment they had planned for him.

In each case, Daniel demonstrates the folly of Babylon’s idols and those who maintain their worship: Bel is not living, and the serpent is no god. In each case the young Jewish man not only ridicules the foreign god but also shows that idol worship should not even be allowed. In each case Daniel operates with a cunning and wisdom reminiscent of some early stories of Israel (e.g., the midwives in Exod. 1). Escaping from the lions’ den demonstrates again that the God of the Jews never abandons the faithful ones; in each case God effects a dramatic reversal of fortunes of the two sides in the contest. Some contend that these stories demonstrate a subtle midrash on Jer. 51:34-35, 44; if so, readers could reflect on Babylonian cruelty against Jerusalem in the 6th century b.c.e. and recognize its reversal in these stories.

The OG and Theodotion versions of this story differ much less than in Susanna, but enough to distinguish some tendencies. In OG Daniel descends from a priestly line, so this story likely predates Dan. 1–6 with its very different view of him; also the notion of a Jewish priest in the king’s court may be imagined for the situation in Ptolemaic Egypt rather than others at that time. If the original language of the story is Hebrew, then a Palestinian setting before the harsh relations with Antiochus Epiphanes may be envisioned. A diaspora setting might better explain the content and theology of the story, but the evidence for either position seems less than sufficient. In the history of interpretation, this story has held far less attraction for hearers than that of Susanna.

Bibliography. J. Collins, Daniel. Herm (Minneapolis, 1993); M. D. Garrard, “Artemisia and Susanna,” in Feminism and Art History, ed. N. Broude and M. D. Garrard (New York, 1982), 147-71; A.-J. Levine, “ ‘Hemmed In on Every Side’: Jews and Women in the Book of Susanna,” in A Feminist Companion to Esther, Judith and Susanna, ed. A. Brenner (Sheffield, 1995), 303-23; C. A. Moore, Daniel, Esther and Jeremiah: The Additions. AB 44 (Garden City, 1977); E. Spolsky, ed., The Judgment of Susanna. SBLEJL 11 (Atlanta, 1996); M. J. Steussy, Gardens in Babylon: Narrative and Faith in the Greek Legends of Daniel. SBLDS 141 (Atlanta, 1993).

John C. Endres, S.J.

Prayer Tents Bible References - Prayer Tents

DANIEL, ADDITIONS TO

Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible (2000)