| Although
Hasel acknowledges the duration of the vision, he stresses that the
phrase, “until when”, places emphasis not on the duration (how long)
but on termination of the vision.90
Since Hasel’s interpretation of the “daily” (Christ’s high
priestly ministry) cannot encompass the entire length of the vision, the
emphasis on the terminus of the vision becomes a natural consequence.
However, it should be recognized that the emphasis on duration in 8:13
comes from the phrase describing the on-going activity in the vision,
namely, “making” (to give) both the sanctuary and the host to be
trampled.” This clearly implies duration, not termination. It is
acknowledged that `ad (until) designates termination but only in
the context of terminating the 2300 years (duration) of the trampling
activity.
Hasel correctly points out that
the construction of Hebrew noun chazon (vision) precludes a literal
genitival relationship such as “the vision of the daily and....”.91
However, Shea suggests92
that the syntactical relationship should be one of apposition giving the
question the significance of “how long the vision, that is the vision in
which the four following works of the little horn are seen?” Moreover,
it is suggested that the four nouns (“the daily”, “the transgression”,
“the sanctuary” and “the host”) following the phrase: “until
when the vision” circumscribe the entire length of the vision which is
also inherently implied in the question itself. More importantly the
exegesis has demonstrated that the “daily” (hattamid) is not
represented by Christ’s priestly ministry but by the self-exalting
character of the pagan nations.
In the vision of Daniel 8, this
self-magnifying behavior (gadal) begins with the ram (Media-Persia)
and continues with each successive world power concluding with Rome.
8.1.2
The Transgression |