The message of the Old Greek
version differs in some important respects from the Aramaic-Hebrew version . .
.Whereas in the Vorlage the eschatological Son of Man probably denotes
the archangel Michael who is authorized for the coming kingdom of God by the
Ancient of Days (See Collins [Daniel, 304-10]), the Old Greek identifies
the coming savior with the Ancient of Days himself and apparently interprets
him as the Messiah, "whose origin is from old, from ancient days"
(Micha 5:2). As a consequence of this, the holy ones of chapter 7, originally
angels, (Collins, Daniel, 313-17) were seen as "the holy people of
the Most High" on earth (7:27). (Klaus Koch, "Stages in the
Canonization of the Book of Daniel," in John J. Collins and Peter W.
Flint, eds., The Book of Daniel: Composition and Reception, 2 vols. [Supplements
to Vetus Testamentum LXXXIII,II; Formation and Interpretation of Old Testament
Literature II, 2; Leiden: Brill, 2001], 2:426-27)
As Collins notes in his commentary on Daniel,
Third, a considerable number of
authors have remained persuaded that the “one like a human being” is individual
but understand him as a heavenly, angelic being rather than the messiah. We
have seen above reason to expect that the “one like a human being” be understood
as a realistic symbol, representing a being who was believed to exist, and that
a human figure in a vision represent an angel or divine being. Within the Book
of Daniel the individual who is singled out as the heavenly counterpart of
Israel is the archangel Michael, “the great prince who stands over your
people.” The view that Michael is the “one like a human being” was put forward
by Nathaniel Schmidt in 1900. Schmidt was followed by several scholars, but his
view gained wide support only in recent years, in the wake of the discovery of
the Dead Sea Scrolls, which threw new light on the prominence of angelic forces
in the religion of the Hellenistic period. The identification of the “one like
a human being” with Michael is greatly strengthened by the arguments below that
the holy ones of the Most High are the angelic host.291 We return to the
identification below, in connection with the holy ones. (John Joseph Collins, Daniel:
A Commentary on the Book of Daniel [Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical
Commentary on the Bible; Minneapolis, Minn: Fortress Press, 1993], 310)
A variant of the angelic
interpretation would identify the “one like a human being” with Gabriel rather
than Michael. Ziony Zevit has offered the ingenious argument that Dan 9:21,
“the man Gabriel whom I had seen in the vision at first,” must refer back to
the “one like a human being” in Daniel 7. It is more plausible, however, to
trace this reference to 7:16, where Daniel asks “one of the attendants” for an
interpretation. Gabriel serves as interpreter in 8:15 and 9:21, so he was
probably identified as the interpreter in chap. 7 too. Michael, the prince of
Israel, is the more appropriate recipient of the kingdom. (Ibid.)