Is there a consistent and pervasive messianic hope in the Old Testament?¹I am thankful for this occasion to honor Don Carson. Though it was not my privilege to study with him in person, his writings and presentations influenced me, most particularly through his commitment to the study and exposition of the original language texts of the Bible in the service of biblical theology for God’s people in the church. In Don’s honor here, I want to revisit something I exposited in my contribution to the New Studies in Biblical Theology, of which I have only become more convinced, and on which my thinking has grown more clear as the years have passed. See James M. Hamilton Jr., With the Clouds of Heaven: The Book of Daniel in Biblical Theology, NSBT 32 (Nottingham: Apollos, 2014). Or is it the case that at a certain point that hope mutated and was transferred away from the expectation of a single figure, with the result that it was expressed in a variety of ways? Does the evidence indicate that, rather than being focused on a future king from David’s line, the messianic hope was “democratized,” such that the hope turned to the people of Israel instead of a future king?

This is the way that many seem to read the references to “the saints of the Most High” receiving the kingdom in Daniel 7:18, 22, 25, and 27. Lucas, for instance, writes, “vv. 22 and 27 indicate a correspondence of some sort between the figure of v. 13 and ‘the (people of) the holy ones of the Most High’.”²Ernest C. Lucas, Daniel, AOTC (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 185. See also 200–201.

Almost entirely unnoticed, subtle details in the text communicate staggering realities in Daniel 7. One major difficulty is that the text is in Aramaic. Other difficulties include the apocalyptic genre of the text and the plethora of information it communicates. Even those who work through the text in the original language could easily read over the elusive but massively significant features of the text to which this article draws.³I did not notice what I here point out in my own initial readings of Daniel 7 in Aramaic, but in writing With the Clouds of Heaven, my attention was drawn to these details by Peter J. Gentry, “The Son of Man in Daniel 7: Individual or Corporate?” in Acorns to Oaks: The Primacy and Practice of Biblical Theology, ed. Michael A. G. Haykin (Toronto: Joshua, 2003), 59–75, who also pointed me to Chrys Caragounis, The Son of Man: Vision and Interpretation, WUNT (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1986).

I have tremendous respect and appreciation for G. K. Beale, but his discussion of Daniel 7 illustrates the general lack of awareness of the textual distinctions to which I want to draw attention in this brief essay in Carson’s honor. Beale rightly sees that Daniel’s vision in the first half of Daniel 7 is interpreted in the second half, but because he has overlooked crucial details in the text, he concludes that “the Son of Man is not mentioned in the … interpretive section.” He thus wrongly concludes, “it is very likely that the interpretive section of the vision identifies the ‘Son of Man’ figure with end-time Israel, ‘the saints of the Most High’ (vv. 18, 22, 27),” and he must appeal to “corporate solidarity and representation” to maintain that “the Son of Man is both an individual and also a representative for a community.”⁴G. K. Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2011), 394–95, with n. 24.

On the contrary, the figure described as “one like a son of man” in 7:13 is repeatedly referenced in Daniel 7:15–28. To demonstrate this, we begin with observations on the two different terms for “Most High” that appear in Daniel 7:25, and from there we will work through the interpretation of the vision in the second half of Daniel 7.

1. The Two Terms for Most High in Daniel 7:25

The only English translation that distinguishes between the two terms for “Most High” in the Aramaic original is the NASB, which reads as follows in Daniel 7:25: “He will speak out against the Most High and wear down the saints of the Highest One … ”⁵I am citing the NASB 1995. The 2020 edition also preserves this distinction. The first Aramaic term, עִלָּיָא, is rendered by the phrase “Most High.” This term appears ten times in the Aramaic section of Daniel (2:4–7:28), always designating the God of Israel as the “Most High.”⁶This term appears in Daniel 3:26, 32 [ET 4:2]; 4:14 [ET 4:17]; 4:21 [ET 4:24], 22 [ET 25], 29 [ET 32], 31 [ET 34]; 5:18, 21; and 7:25. The abbreviation ET designates English Translation. The English and Hebrew verse numbering differs at the end of Daniel 3 and beginning of Daniel 4. English translations begin chapter 4 where the Hebrew enumerates 3:31, so that 4:1 in the Hebrew text is 4:4 in the English. A ketiv/qere reading occurs each time this term appears. The ketiv in the text reads עִלָּיָא, while the qere in the margin is עִלָּאָה. The only instance of עִלָּיָא in chapter 7 is at v. 25. The second Aramaic term for “Most High” is rendered by the phrase “Highest One” in the NASB, though most English translations (CSB, ESV, JPS, NET, NIV, NKJV) also translate it “Most High.” In distinction from the normal Aramaic term, however, the NASB’s “Highest One” translates עֶלְיוֹנִין. This term occurs only four times in the Old Testament, all in Daniel 7, at 7:18, 22, 25, and 27. Each instance of this term occurs in the expression קַדִּישֵׁי עֶלְיוֹנִין, “saints of the Most High,” and, as noted, the NASB renders this “saints of the Highest One,” distinguishing between “Most High” for עִלָּיָא and “Highest One” for עֶלְיוֹנִין. This second term, which the NASB renders “Highest One,” appears to be an Aramaicized form of the Hebrew term for “most high,” עֶלְיוֹן.⁷HALOT 1948.

We thus have two terms that mean “Most High,” one from the Aramaic language (עִלָּיָא), one from the Hebrew (עֶלְיוֹנִין). The Hebrew term has been Aramaicized through the addition of the masculine plural Aramaic suffix and seems to be used in synonymous distinction from the already employed Aramaic term.

The use of this Aramaicized Hebrew term עֶלְיוֹנִין in the expression קַדִּישֵׁי עֶלְיוֹנִין, “saints of the Most High,” indicates that Daniel does not intend to associate the saints with the figure he designates as “Most High” by the Aramaic term עִלָּיָא but with one who is also “Most High” but distinguished from him. Thus a second, seemingly equivalent, way to designate someone as “Most High” has been brought into Aramaic from the cognate Hebrew language. Why would Daniel make this move? Who is being designated by this second way of referring to someone as “Most High”?

Given the parallels between Daniel 7:14 and 7:27, the answer to this question seems clear. Consider these texts side by side (corresponding terms underlined in English translation):

Daniel 7:14

Daniel 7:27

וְלֵהּ יְהִיב שָׁלְטָן וִיקָר וּמַלְכוּ וְכֹל עַמְמַיָּא אֻמַיָּא וְלִשָּׁנַיָּא לֵהּ יִפְלְחוּן שָׁלְטָנֵהּ שָׁלְטָן עָלַם דִּי־לָא יֶעְדֵּה וּמַלְכוּתֵהּ דִּי־לָא תִתְחַבַּל ESV: And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.

וּמַלְכוּתָה וְשָׁלְטָנָא וּרְבוּתָא דִּי מַלְכְוָת תְּחוֹת כָּל־שְׁמַיָּא יְהִיבַת לְעַם קַדִּישֵׁי עֶלְיוֹנִין מַלְכוּתֵהּ מַלְכוּת עָלַם וְכֹל שָׁלְטָנַיָּא לֵהּ יִפְלְחוּן וְיִשְׁתַּמְּעוּן ESV: 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; his kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.

Both texts assert that the nations will “serve him,” and the third masculine singular pronoun “him” in 7:14 points back to the “one like a son of man” in 7:13. The third masculine singular pronoun in 7:27, on the other hand, points back to the “Most High/Highest One,” designated as עֶלְיוֹנִין in distinction from the Ancient of Days in 7:9. This first figure to take his seat in 7:9, the Ancient of Days, appears to be the one designated as “Most High” with the Aramaic term עִלָּיָא in 7:25 and elsewhere in the Aramaic sections of Daniel.

To summarize this section: there are two terms for “Most High” in Daniel 7:25, עִלָּיָא and עֶלְיוֹנִין. The first of these, עִלָּיָא, appears ten times in the Aramaic sections of Daniel to designate Israel’s God. The second, עֶלְיוֹנִין, seems to have been brought into Aramaic from Hebrew to designate a second figure as “Most High” in addition to the one already known as “Most High.” Whereas Daniel refers to God as “Most High” with the normal Aramaic term, he refers to the “one like a son of man” (7:13) as “Most High” with the Aramaicized Hebrew term עֶלְיוֹנִין in the four instances of the expression “saints of the Most High” at 7:18, 22, 25, and 27.

2. The Flow of Thought in Context

Note that in Daniel 7:9, “thrones were placed.”⁸Unless otherwise noted, I will use the ESV for English translations. Writing in the 500s BC, Daniel would have had access to Psalm 110, which David composed around 1000 BC. The key point from Psalm 110:1 is that the already seated Yahweh invites David’s Lord to sit at his right hand and thereby be enthroned with him. The Ancient of Days takes his seat in 7:9, and Daniel seems to interpret the vision he receives in light of God’s promises to establish the throne of the seed of David forever (2 Sam 7:12–14) and the Psalm 110:1 invitation for David’s Lord to sit at Yahweh’s right hand. The “one like a son of man” in Daniel 7:13, then, is to be understood as the future king from David’s line, as attested from the fact that he receives an everlasting kingdom in 7:14. The only kingdom in the Old Testament that will be established forever is the one over which the seed of David will reign (2 Sam 7:12–14).

Having seen the vision in 7:1–14, Daniel approaches one of the “thousand thousands” and “ten thousand times ten thousand” (7:10) who “stood there” (7:16) in attendance on the Ancient of Days in the heavenly court. Significantly, Daniel presents this heavenly being, this angelic interpreter, as the one who introduces the phrase “saints of the Most High” to him in 7:18. Alarmed by what he had seen (7:16), Daniel sought “the interpretation of the things” (7:16) from a member of the heavenly court, and that heavenly being spoke the words of 7:18. In the angel’s words in 7:17–18, he offers a two-verse interpretation of the vision Daniel saw in 7:1–14. The four beasts symbolize four kings (7:17), and after them the “saints of the Highest One/Most High” will receive an everlasting kingdom (7:18).

Thus Daniel indicates that it was not his idea to describe “the one like a son of man” as “Most High” in parallel with and distinction from the “Ancient of Days” by bringing the Hebrew term for “Most High” into Aramaic so as to distinguish this figure from the one being referred to as “Most High” with the ordinary Aramaic expression. As Daniel tells the story, the angel made this move, revealing to Daniel that the “one like a son of man” was to be identified with and yet distinguished from the “Most High.”

The “saints” or “holy ones” are the people of the kingdom (some argue they are angels, but “saints” stands in apposition to “people” in the original Aramaic, so I take them to be people), and the “one like a son of man” or “Highest One/Most High” is the king of the kingdom inherited by the saints. There is no kingdom without a king, and these “saints” are not identified simply with God. To identify the saints with God, Daniel could present the angel referring to the “saints of the Most High” using the normal Aramaic term, עִלָּיָא, rather than importing the Hebrew term into Aramaic for a second way of referring to the the Most High/Highest One with the term עֶלְיוֹנִין. This “Highest One” is the king of the kingdom the saints receive, as described in 7:13–14. He is the “one like a son of man”: the king of the kingdom received by the saints is the seed of David, David’s Lord.

Daniel communicates his desire to know more about the fourth beast in 7:19–20, before adding new information about the arrival of the Ancient of Days and the kingdom of the son of man in 7:21–22. Whereas the little horn from the fourth kingdom was “speaking great things” in 7:9 (so also 7:20), Daniel elaborates on this that he “made war on the saints and prevailed over them” in 7:21. This leaves 7:22 to provide Daniel’s summary of 7:9–14 before the angel offers his explanation of the same in 7:23–27. The table that follows aligns the text of 7:9–14 with Daniel’s summary of these events in 7:22.

Daniel 7:9–14

Daniel 7:22

As I looked, thrones were placed, and the Ancient of Days took his seat; his clothing was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was fiery flames; its wheels were burning fire. 10 A stream of fire issued and came out from before him; a thousand thousands served him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him; the court sat in judgment, and the books were opened. 11 I looked then because of the sound of the great words that the horn was speaking. And as I looked, the beast was killed, and its body destroyed and given over to be burned with fire. 12 As for the rest of the beasts, their dominion was taken away, but their lives were prolonged for a season and a time. 13 I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. 14 And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.

until the Ancient of Days came, and judgment was given for the saints of the Most High, and the time came when the saints possessed the kingdom.

The arrival of the Ancient of Days for judgment, originally described in 7:9–10, is compressed into the first two phrases of 7:22. The judgment rendered for “the saints of the Most High” in 7:22 is the judgment that puts an end to the little horn’s war on the saints, and these saints are the people of the “Highest One/Most High” (so designated with the Aramaicized Hebrew term עֶלְיוֹנִין). As in 7:9–14, so in 7:22. The Ancient of Days judges the little horn from the fourth kingdom, vindicating the saints, granting the kingdom to the “one like a son of man.” In 7:22 this “one like a son of man” is referred to as the “Highest One/Most High” (עֶלְיוֹנִין).

Just as Daniel summarized and added to the vision of the fourth beast (7:7–14) in 7:19–22, so the angel summarizes and adds to it again in 7:23–27. Here again the little horn from the fourth kingdom speaks against the “Most High,” God, and here Daniel presents the angel using the normal Aramaic term עִלָּיָא to refer to God as the Most High (7:25a; cf. 7:8, 20). In addition to speaking against God, the little horn persecutes “the saints of the Highest One/Most High” (7:25b; cf. 7:21). Again, the Aramaicized Hebrew term עֶלְיוֹנִין designates the figure with whom the saints are associated, the one like a son of man. The final clauses of 7:25 indicate that the little horn from the fourth kingdom will speak against God and persecute God’s people for three and one half years (cf. 9:27; 8:14; 12:7, 11–12).

As in Daniel 7:9–14, so in 7:26–27. The little horn’s terror is brought to an end by the judgment of God: the court sits (7:26; 7:9–10), the books are opened (7:10), and the verdict goes against the little horn. In 7:11 “the beast was killed,” and in 7:26b he is “to be consumed and destroyed to the end.” Dominion was taken from the beasts in 7:12, and it was taken from the little horn in 7:26a. The everlasting kingdom received by the “one like a son of man” in 7:14 is given to the Highest One/Most High, the king over the people of the kingdom, the saints, in 7:27.

3. Conclusion

In this short piece I hope to have made accessible to a wider audience a profoundly significant textual reality in Daniel 7. In this passage, there are two figures, the Ancient of Days and the “one like a son of man,” who share an important set of commonalities: first, both are to be enthroned (7:9); second, though the “one like a son of man” is to be presented before the Ancient of Days, he is already present in the heavenly court, indicating that rather than coming into being, he is preexistent; third, this “one like a son of man” travels on the clouds of heaven, and elsewhere in the Old Testament only Yahweh travels on the clouds (Exod 19:9; 34:5; Num 11:25); and fourth, both the Ancient of Days and the “one like a son of man” are referred to as “Most High.” Even as there are commonalities between these two figures, there are also important ways in which they are distinguished: different but equivalent terms are used to designate each as “Most High.” The Ancient of Days is called “Most High” with the ordinary Aramaic term, עִלָּיָא. The angelic interpreter, by contrast, introduces an Aramaicized form of the Hebrew for “Most High,” עֶלְיוֹנִין, and uses it to designate the “one like a son of man” as “Highest One/Most High.” In addition, there is no suggestion that we are not dealing with two persons, the Ancient of Days and the “one like a son of man,” but one. There are obviously two figures, and this explains why “thrones were placed” (7:9).

The revelation about the Most High in Daniel 7 neither confounds the persons nor divides the substance.⁹The language of this paragraph is indebted to the Athanasian Creed. For the English language version I use, see James M. Hamilton Jr., “The Chiastic Structure of the Athanasian Creed,” JETS 66 (2023): 279–300. There is one person who is Ancient of Days, and there is another person who is the “one like a son of man.” But the “Most High-ness” of the Ancient of Days and of the “one like the son of man,” though distinguished, is equivalent. The Ancient of Days is not the “one like a son of man,” and both are Most High. We might be so bold as to say there are not two Most Highs but one Most High. Two persons who share one substance, and more will be directly revealed in the New Testament.

Daniel was alarmed by what he saw (Dan 7:15, 28). It is intriguing to ponder just how “Nicene” or “Athanasian” his understanding of what he saw would have been. But this I conclude with confidence: the “one like a son of man” is the Highest One.

---