6 Comments
User's avatar
Sarah's avatar

I learned a lot from this post. You've done a great job taking something complicated and making it simple. I'm definating looking forward to the rest of this series!

I just want to clarify...

The NETS translation used the Old Greek and Brenton's use the Theodotion version.

Is that correct?

Kevin Potter's avatar

Not quite. NETS actually includes both Theodotion and the Old Greek.

Jonathan Wolf's avatar

Daniel is such a good test case for readers because it makes textual plurality hard to avoid. Once a book exists in multiple ancient forms, "the text" stops feeling like one clean object and starts looking like a history of transmission, reception, and communal use.

That does not make Daniel weaker. It makes the book more interesting, because the different voices show how living traditions carry texts forward instead of simply freezing them.

Kevin Potter's avatar

Yes, exactly!

Tessa Brandt (Markham)'s avatar

Very good information here. I’ve always found Daniel to be one of the most complicated books to study. Looking forward to more on here.

Kevin Potter's avatar

Daniel is definitely complex. It comes with being so theologically rich, I think.

I'm grateful that you're getting value from it and I pray my work continues to bless you 🙏🏻