.
Daniel 7:15-17 then refers to a discussion Daniel had with "one of those standing there" -
15 “I, Daniel, was troubled in spirit, and the visions that passed through my mind disturbed me. 16 I approached one of those standing there and asked him the meaning of all this.
“So he told me and gave me the interpretation of these things: 17 ‘The four great beasts are four kings that will rise from the earth. 18 But the holy people of the Most High will receive the kingdom and will possess it forever—yes, for ever and ever.’
It seems that 'one standing there' may have been in the dream too (?)
kennethgreifer wrote:How do Christians explain their belief that God and the Messiah (son of man) are seen together in a vision or dream by Daniel in Daniel 7:13-14, if they believe that only one person (the Messiah) can be seen? I would guess that they would have to say that God can be seen in visions or dreams because you are not really seeing God, but just an image. I can't find this explanation anywhere. I am sure someone has discussed this in some scholarly book or religious book somewhere. Do Christians ever explain this anywhere or do they just ignore this confusing detail? When I ask ordinary Christians on the internet, they just say it is a mystery, and they are satisfied by that answer.
As for what Christians think, I don't know.
Is there actually any problem with the speculation that you've offered to harmonize it?
I would guess that they would have to say that God can be seen in visions or dreams because you are not really seeing God, but just an image.
(... Of course, in reality, needless to say, the author of Daniel never even had the slightest inkling of anything called a "Trinity" and didn't think of the Messiah as being in any way God himself.)
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
I am just wondering how they explain seeing two "persons" of G-d in Daniel 7:13-14 when they believe only one "person" can be seen, unless they say that more than one person can be seen in visions and dreams, but not in reality. Seeing two of them together would not fit their beliefs, if I understand correctly.
Kenneth Greifer
It seems to me many vision or dreams recounted in various books of the OT are ambiguous or have changing entities in them.
I am not trying to approve or disapprove of what it says, I am just trying to understand how they explain seeing two persons of God in a vision. Usually Christians say that only one can be seen since Exodus 33:20 says people can't see God's face and live. Maybe you have a different explanation like Daniel didn't actually see God's face. I am just trying to understand this issue. I was thinking that in a vision, you could say that a person is not really seeing God, but only an image of God.
Kenneth Greifer
Augustine The Trinity Book 2 chapter 7 argues that in Daniel (and other OT passages) neither the Son nor the Father were physically seen in their true nature, what was perceived was a symbolic likeness.
Thank you for telling me about the book The Trinity by Augustine. I looked it up, and I read what he said. Still, I wonder why modern Christians don't mention this when they discuss Daniel 7:13-14. I guess they don't notice the problem of two "persons" being seen in one vision and how it contradicts their beliefs.
kennethgreifer wrote:I guess they don't notice the problem of two "persons" being seen in one vision and how it contradicts their beliefs.
Seeing two persons doesn't contradict the concept of trinity. Trinity is defined as "different persons, same substance", in the Platonic sense. What you see is a different matter altogether, as that's just ancillary. It's the same with the bread and the flesh during communion, where the substance is flesh and what you see is bread.
Of course, if you are a Catholic and mix all those dogmata, the result becomes unpleasant. If you are not a Catholic, it doesn't matter.
