Is Jesus the "Ancient of Days" spoken of in Daniel 7?
Daniel 7:9
I saw until thrones were placed, and one who was ancient of days sat: his clothing was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was fiery flames, [and] the wheels of it burning fire. -- World English.
Daniel 7:13
I saw in the night-visions, and, behold, there came with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man, and he came even to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. --World English.
Daniel 7:22
until the ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High, and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom. -- World English.
According to some, one of the titles (or “names”) of Jesus is “Ancient of Days”. One has claimed: “The book of Daniel also speaks of Christ, Who is represented as both the Ancient of Days and the Son of man.” Another claims: “Jesus is the Ancient of Days, the one on the throne, our judge, our redeemer.” It is also claimed: “Daniel 7:21-22 verifies that ‘the Ancient of days’ is Jesus Christ.” These offer scriptures that, with only a surface examination, may seem to support their conclusions, but when the scriptures are examined closely, we believe that this conclusion is not valid.
On the other hand, many, if not most, trinitarian scholars do realize that the Ancient of Days is the Father of Jesus, but claim that Jesus and the Ancient of Days are both one God.
Some others claim that Jesus is the Ancient of Days and he is also the one described as like “a son of a man,” claiming the dualism or "hypostatic union" of Jesus being both God Almighty and a human being. Of course, in reality, no such concept that Jesus is two beings [God Almighty/Supreme Being and man/ human being] at the same time is ever even once presented in the Bible. It is another of the extra-Biblical concepts that has been formulated beyond what is found in the Bible, and then added to, and read into, many scriptures, in order to accommodate the trinitarian concept, which concept is also no where to be found in any scripture.
The scriptures do, however, reveal that the one who appeared like a son of man in Daniel’s prophetic vision is Jesus, and the Ancient of Days is the One described in the Revelation is He who sits on the throne, that is, Jehovah, the God of Jesus.
Nevertheless, the designation in Daniel 7:13 may seem to some to refer to Jesus simply as a man, as it is applied to the mankind in general in Psalm 8:4 and Hebrews 2:6, and to Jesus specifically as a man in Hebrews 2:9, as he was in the days of his flesh. (Hebrews 5:7) If we carefully anslyze what is stated, we find that Daniel does not say that he saw “the son of man,” but that he saw one “like” a son of a man. This would indicate an appearance of the one who comes in the clouds as though he were a son of a man, but not actually so, evidently similar to the the way the angels appeared to Abraham as “men”, when they were not actually men. Many translations add the word “the” before “son of man”, but the Hebrew does not have it. Likewise, there is no definite article before the word “man”. In other words the expression in Daniel 7:13 is indefinite on both nouns, while the expression -- in the New Testament Greek -- that is usually used of Jesus to designate him as the Messiah is literally translated as “son of the man,” containing to definite article before the word for "man", which apparently designates the Messiah the son of the man David. In Matthew 24:30; 26:64; Mark 13:26; 14:62; Luke 21:27, for instance, we find that Jesus is depicted, not as one like a son of a man, but as the "Son of the Man," evidently referring to Jesus with a Messianic title as being the promised son of the man, David. (Matthew 1:1; 9:6,27; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8,23,32,40; 13:37,41; 16:13,27,28; 17:9,12,22; 18:11; 19:28; 20:18; 22:42; 24:27,30,37,39,44; 25:13,31; 26:2,24; 26:45; Luke 1:32,69; 3:31; John 7:42; Acts 13:34; Romans 1:3; 2 Timothy 2:8; Revelation 3:7; 22:16) Most translations, however, fail to distinguish between the two phrases, "son of a man," and "son of the man," so the distinction between the two terms are not made apparent. In Revelation 14:14, however, the expression in the Greek is not definite, but indefinite, "son of a man," and corresponds to Daniel 7:13. In both scriptures, Jesus is spoken of as being like a son of man, not that he was actually human being.
We also should note that in Daniel we are dealing with a vision of symbolism, which symbolism represent realities. In those visions, what Daniel saw being symbolically depicted is how Jesus appears symbolically to the world, as with clouds. This symbolism is also used in Isaiah 5:30, which coincides with the time of trouble that Daniel (Daniel 12:1) later speaks of. “They shall roar against them in that day like the roaring of the sea: and if one look to the land [earth], behold, darkness [and] distress; and the light is darkened in the clouds of it.” Clouds are also be used in the Bible in connection with glory. (Exodus 16:10; 40:35) Jesus speaks of his coming with glory, saying: “then the sign of the Son of [the] Man will appear in the sky. Then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of [the] Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory.” (Matthew 24:30) “I tell you, henceforth [after this] you will see the Son of [the] Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of the sky.” (Matthew 26:64) “Then will they see the Son of [the] Man coming in clouds with great power and glory.” (Mark 13:26) “You will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of the sky.” (Mark 14:62) And the angel of Jehovah stated in the Revelation concerning Jesus: “He is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, including those who pierced him. All the tribes of the earth will mourn over him.” (Revelation 1:7) Thus the one like a son of man is described by Jesus being the same as the son of the man (the man, David), that is, Jesus himself.
Daniel 7:13 - I saw in the night-visions, and, behold, there came with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man, and he came even to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. -- World English.
Obviously, two persons are depicted here: The ancient of days and the "done like a son of [a] man."
The “Ancient of Days” is understood by many Protestant Bible commentators to be applied to the God and Father of Jesus, and from the trinitarian standpoint, it is often assumed to represent the first person of their alleged triune God. John Gill states regarding the Ancient of Days in Daniel 7:9:
And the Ancient of days did sit; on one of the thrones pitched, as chief Judge: this is to be understood of God the Father, as distinct from the Messiah, the Son of God, said to be like the Son of man brought unto him, Daniel 7:13 and is so called, not only because he is from everlasting, and without beginning of days; but chiefly because he is permanent, and endures for ever; his years fail not, and of his days there will be no end; and he will be when these empires, signified by the four beasts, will be no more; and very fit to be Judge of them, because of his consummate wisdom and prudence, signified also by this phrase; and the divine Father of Christ is still more proper, because it is in Christ's cause the judgment will proceed; and this in order to introduce him openly into his dominions in the world.
Concerning the one like a son of man in verse 13, Gill states:
And, behold one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven; not Judas Maccabaeus, as Porphyry; nor the Roman people, as Grotius; nor the people of Israel, as Aben Ezra; nor the people of the saints of the most High, as Cocceius; but the Messiah, as most Christian interpreters, and even the Jews themselves, both ancient and modern, allow.
Gill, John. "Commentary on Daniel 7".
"The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible".
Matthew Henry says regarding Ancient of Days in Daniel 7:9:
The Ancient of days - God Almighty; and this is the only place in the sacred writings where God the Father is represented in a human form.
And regarding he who is like a son of a man:
The Messiah is here called the Son of man--one like unto the Son of man for he was made in the likeness of sinful flesh, was found in fashion as a man. I saw one like unto the Son of man, one exactly agreeing with the idea formed in the divine counsels of him that in the fulness of time was to be the Mediator between God and man. He is like unto the son of man, but is indeed the Son of God. Our Savior seems plainly to refer to this vision when he says (John 5:27) that the Father has therefore given him authority to execute judgment because he is the Son of man, and because he is the person whom Daniel saw in vision, to whom a kingdom and dominion were to be given.
Henry, Matthew. "Complete Commentary on Daniel 7:4".
"Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible".
Adam Clarke states of Ancient of Days in verse 9:
The Ancient of days - God Almighty; and this is the only place in the sacred writings where God the Father is represented in a human form.
Regarding verse 13, Clarke states:
One like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven - This most certainly points out the Lord Jesus, אנש בר bar enosh, the Son of miserable man; who took our nature upon him that he might redeem us unto himself. To prove himself to be the Messiah he applies, before the high priests, these words of the Prophet Daniel to himself Matthew 24:30.
Near before him - The Ancient of days.
Clarke, Adam. "Commentary on Daniel 7:4".
"The Adam Clarke Commentary".
We believe that the “Ancient of Days” represents Jehovah, the God and Father of Jesus, but the idea that the Ancient of Days is the first person of an alleged triune God has to be assumed in the realm of human imagination, added to, and read into what is stated.
We have been asked two questions:
a. Who is the Ancient of Days? Our answer is that the Ancient of Days is Jehovah, the God and Father of Jesus.
b. Was He the one sitting on the throne of whom the Son of Man came or he is the one coming for the saints to possess the kingdom? Our answer is that the Ancient of Days is the one sitting on the throne, and that the Ancient of Days is not the one who is like a son of man.
The person who asks the above questions concludes from these questions that “the Father and the Son are one God.”
Although we are not certain exactly the purpose of for the questions, evidently it is in some vague way meant to claim that Jesus and His God and Father are one God. Apparently, the thought is that by connecting some of the words that are related to both Ancient of Days and also the one designated as like a son of man, that this means that both are God.
Some claim that Jesus is the Ancient of Days because judgment is spoken of in connection with the Ancient of Days, and we read that Jesus judges the living and the dead. (1 Timothy 4:1) The reality is that the Ancient of Days (Jehovah) comes to judge the world through the one whom he as ordained, his Son Jesus Christ. (Psalm 96:13; 98:9; Acts 17:13; Romans 2:16) This does not mean that the one whom God ordained to judge the world is God, or a person of God.
Jesus stated:
John 5:22 - For neither does the Father judge any man, but he has given all judgment to the Son.
The God and Father of Jesus does not directly do the judging; he has committing all the judging to His Son.
Thus, in Acts 17:13, we find that one person who is God in the preceding verses will judge by means of Jesus, whom God has ordained to do such judging. But there will more who will be judging along with Jesus:
Speaking prophetically, Daniel says:
“Judgment was given to the saints of the Most High, and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.” — Daniel 7:22.
This speaks of the saints, in that the authority to judge was given to the saints.
The language used in Daniel 7:22 is basically the same language that is used of Jesus in John 5:22:
For neither does the Father judge any man, but he has given all judgment to the Son. — World English.
Additionally, Paul states:
Don’t you know that the saints will judge the world? — 1 Corinthians 6:2.
And we also read:
Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly I tell you, that you who have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on the throne of his glory, you also will sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. — Matthew 19:28.
Likewise, John wrote prophetically of those who participate in the first resurrection:
I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. — Revelation 20:4.
Furthermore, the Hebrew word translated as given in Daniel 7:27 is the same word that is used in Daniel 7:27, which states:
And the kingdom and the dominion, and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High. Their kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey them.
In Daniel 7:27, it is not that the kingdom is given on behalf of the saints, but rather it means that the kingdom is given to the saints, and they actually receive the authority and power to rule. Likewise, in Daniel 7:22, it is not that the judgment is given on behalf of the saints, but rather the power and authority is given to saints so that they judge both the world of mankind and the angels. -- 1 Corinthians 6:2,3.
The Ancient of Days is said to come to judge, and also the son comes to judge, but by a comparison of scriptures we realize that the Ancient of Days comes to judge representatively through, or by means of his Son, whom he has ordained. (Acts 17:31) As we stated, however, none of this means that Jesus and his God are both one God, etc. Any such thought has to imagined and assumed upon what the scriptures actually say.
But the real point is that he who is like a son of a man is brought before He who is "Ancient of Days." Jesus, being the brought before the Ancient of Days, is therefore, not the Ancient of Days before whom he brought.
The Ancient of Days corresponds to He who is on the throne, He who is, was and is to come, of Revelation 1:4,8; 4:8-10; 5:1,7; 6:16; 7:10,15; 19:4; 21:5.
He who is like a son of a man in Daniel 7:13 corresponds to the figurative "lamb" of Revelation 5:6,8,12,13; 6:1,16; 7:9,10,14,17 and he who is like a son of a man in Revelation 1:13; 14:14. In Daniel 7:13, the one like a son of man is brought before the Ancient of Days; in Revelation 5:7, the lamb is pictured as coming before He who is the throne, and takes the book out of the right hand of him who is on the throne. Jesus, therefore is not being pictured in Daniel 7 as the Ancient of Days, but as the one who is brought before the Ancient of Days.
Some Related Studies:
One has presented several objections/assertions regarding our conclusion that the Ancient of Days refers, not to Jesus, but his God. We addressing these one at a time below:
1) "Since Jesus Christ has no beginning of Days nor end of life." The fact is no scripture presents such an idea. Some may read such an idea into Hebrews 7:3, but that is not what it says. See our study:
2) "And since he is God." Assuming "God" here to mean "Supreme Being," the fact is that no scripture presents Jesus as being the Supreme Being. In the Bible, only the God and Father of Jesus is presented as being the Supreme Being. See our study:
3) "The reference you provided is provided by the Holy Spirit to help us distinguish between the Father and the Son." Since the one God of whom are all (1 Corinthians 8:6) is always distinguished from being the Son of the one God of whom are all, yes, the same distinction is presented in Daniel 7.
This statement, however, is evidently meant to refer to the trinitarian 3 persons of God. Since the Bible never presents the one God of whom are all (1 Corinthians 8:6) as being more than one person, the idea of distinguishing the imagined and assumed persons of the imagined and assumed trinitarian God scripturally has no relevance to Daniel 7.
4) "As God, Jesus had no beginning!" Again assuming "God" to mean Supreme Being, no scripture presents Jesus as as the Supreme Being, and no scripture presents Jesus as having no beginning, although this idea is read into several scriptures. See links to various studies provided on our page:
5) "As a man, he cane into existence approximately 2,000 years ago in the little town of Bethlehem." This we agree with; the Logos of God, who was with God, was before a became flesh, a mighty spirit being, but he was not the Supreme Being whom he had been with. The body (substance) that Jesus had before he became flesh was that which Paul likened to a celestial body -- substance), which Paul contrasts with the terrestrial, flesh, physical body (substance). (1 Corinthians 15:39-41) Jesus, while he was in the days of his flesh (Hebrews 5:7), possessed the sinless glory of a human being (Romans 3:23; 2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter 2:22; 1 John 3:5), a little lower than the angels. -- Psalm 8:4,5; Hebrews 2:6-9.
Before he became flesh, however, he had a different glory -- a different body (substance), the celestial glory, which he asked to be returned to him. Thus, he did not possess two forms of substance at once as trinitarians and oneness believers claim. -- John 17:5.
6) "The Jewish understanding of God only permits for the belief in a Mono (singular) theistic understanding." Monotheism as a word is definted aside from the Bible. As such it is not in the Bible. The Jewish adoption of this term, we believe, is appropriate, however, in the definition given is the belief that there is only one God. "God" with a capital "G" usually refers to Supreme Being. The Bible does present only one Supreme Being, and Paul identifies that one Supreme Being as being the God and Father of Jesus. -- 1 Corinthians 8:6; Ephesians 1:3.
If however, "monotheism" is defined as meaning that forms the Hebrew and Greek words for God (often transliterated as EL and THEOS) cannot be used of any except Jehovah or false gods, this would be incorrect, since the Bible does use these words of many others than Jehovah or false gods, and thus they can be used also of the Son of the Most High without meaning that Jesus is the Most High Jehovah. See our study:
7) "The Schema of Deuteronomy 6:4 allows for a unified plurality of being for the Lord." We are assuming that this is meant to say that there is something written in Deuteronomy 6:4 that gives meaning to the trinitarian claim that Jehovah is three persons. Some claim that the word "one" can mean more than one person, and it can, as speaking of one group, figurative body, family, etc. In such, however, one one member of the group is never equal to the totality of group. If this is applied to the trinity doctrine, it would mean that Jesus is part of, but not wholly and fully, the Supreme Being; it would mean that the Father is part of, but not wholly and fully the Supreme Being, and likewise with Jehovah's Holy Spirit. The reality is that there is nothing in Deuteronomy 8:6 that supports the trinitarian claims. For more related to this, see our study:
