The late E. J. Young was, after R. D. Wilson, the most erudite and devoted student of the Old Testament this century has yet produced. Possessing a working knowledge of at least 26 languages (including all the Semitic and a variety of modern ones), besides a deep reverence for the Word of God, and a humility evident to all who knew him, he was unquestionably the best-equipped modern scholar to undertake an analytical commentary on the prophecies of Daniel. The present work, both in the author’s own translation of the Hebrew and Aramaic, and in the painstaking attention to detail and problems raised by the text, is sufficient witness to Dr Young’s meticulous scholarship and sanctified industry.
Contrary to the view of many modern scholars, Dr Young, while admitting the difficulties in holding that the book was written by Daniel in the 6th century B.C., firmly maintained this view, and accordingly treats the inspired text with profound reverence. His carefully-weighed conclusions on the smallest phrases and apparently most insignificant words, remind us of the commentaries of the Jewish rabbis in their high regard for the text.
Among several notable features of the commentary, we might single out Dr Young’s constant acknowledgment of the sovereignty of God over the smallest human actions, and his appreciation of the transcendent riches of His grace in His dealings with Daniel and the people of God. Likewise, his remarks on the wondrous efficacy of the Redeemer’s death are conspicuously fine. His employment of oriental languages (notably Persian) to shed light on the text is very impressive, as is his description of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream-image in symbolising the “progressive inferiority” of the pagan empires. The commentary,
however, is sadly marred for the unscholarly reader by its ponderous consideration and tedious refutation of critical views, and its detailed discussion of certain passages (e.g. the “sevens” of 9:24-27 and the ‘days’ of 12:11). Certainly, this is a commentary for scholars, for it does little to engage the affections and captivate the will to the service of Daniel’s God. In this respect, despite its superior scholarship, the commentary is far inferior to Calvin’s on the same book.
J.M.B.