What happened to the Tribe of Dan? – Revelation 7:5-8
One peculiar feature of the listing of the twelve tribes of Israel in Revelation 7 is the fact that the tribe of Dan is missing. As Leon Morris says, “It is not really necessary to list the tribes. But doing this puts some stress on the inclusion of all God's people. “There are 12,000 from each tribe except Dan, which is omitted. The twelve are then made up by including Manasseh as well as Joseph. This is rather curious, for Manasseh is included in Joseph. If there are two Joseph tribes we expect Ephraim and Manasseh. Some scholars see a copyist's error, 'Dan' being read as 'Man' and subsequently taken as an abbreviation for 'Manasseh.' This seems unlikely and it is more probable that Dan was omitted because of its association with idolatry, or because the antichrist was supposed to come from this tribe.” Other commentators flesh out these comments laid out by Morris, and are categorized below on the basis of their arguments.
Textual Confusion
Mounce states: Some have suggested that Dan was inadvertently copied as Man, which was later taken as an abbreviation for Manasseh. This would solve both problems [i.e.the inclusion of both Manasseh and Joseph, since Manasseh...is included in Joseph [and] the omission of Dan. Unfortunately it is only conjecture unsupported by any solid evidence [other than two minor manuscripts].”
It is telling that neither Comfort's nor Metzger's standard commentaries on New Testament textual criticism even mention this possibility.
Bruce is similarly skeptical concerning this hypothetical scenario: “It is strange to find Manasseh listed separately, since the tribe of Joseph (embracing Ephraim and Manasseh) is listed in verse 7. On the other hand, the tribe of Dan is omitted. It may be thought that Dan originally stood where Manasseh now stands, but such a conjecture is unsupported by any evidence.”
Small Size
One problem is in trying to pin down the exact location occupied by the tribe of Dan since it was by far the smallest of the twelve tribes, as a glance at a map found in most study Bibles or in a Bible atlas will show.
Knoppers reviews the biblical evidence: “The tribe of Dan's first settlement is depicted as lying between the territories of Ephraim to the north, Benjamin to the east, and Judah to the south (Josh. 19:40-48)...Already at an early time, a majority of the tribe migrated northward to a site near the source of the Jordan river (Josh. 19.47-48; Judg. 1.34). Hence, Dan often marks the northern border of Israel...however, some members of the tribe must have remained in the south. With the rise of the monarchy, these southern clans were apparently assimilated into the kingdoms of Israel and Judah.”
Thus, Payne quotes Walvoord as stating: “Dan...was small in number, and probably thereafter was classified with Naphtali, born of the same mother as Dan.” But nonetheless, Walvoord adds, “However, Dan is mentioned in Ezekiel 48:2 in the millennial land distribution.” That latter comment, of course, is only pertinent assuming that (1) Ezekiel's listing refers to the end times and (2) is to be taken literally, both of which are highly disputed points.
Aberrant Religious Practices
Concerning the possibility that idolatry was Dan's main problem, one of the few inscriptions identifying
by name a geographical location in the Bible was found at the remains of 3rd-2nd cent. BC Dan. It
read, "to God who is in Dan" in Greek and Aramaic. Archeologists have discovered a number of items
associated with the temple at Dan. From a count of the types of animal bones found there, they
conclude that sacrificial worship was observed strictly according to levitical laws (Leviticus 7:8,
32-33; Exodus 29:27-28). This may indicate that God's displeasure with the temple was not at all due
to how they worshipped, but where they built their temple (i.e. not in Jerusalem).
Morris points out that this was the favored view of the rabbis. “Thus Rabbi Johanan said that Abraham
prophetically 'saw his descendants who would practice idolatry in Dan.'”
“There are those who are sealed to defy the totality of Satan's secular dominion. They are drawn from
the various tribes of Israel...Dan and Ephraim are missing from the list. In Old Testament history, both
these tribes were prominent for their connection with idolatry. Perhaps in a coming day they take the
lead in hailing the beast as Messiah.” (Phillips)
Ellul, along with most scholars, sees a description of two groups of saved in Chapter 7. One is an
uncountable number of all non-Jewish people (vv. 9-12). As for the 144,000, he states that “it is a
group that comes first; it can finally not be evaded that there is the designation of the tribes of Israel
(and even with the device, become traditional, of the suppression of the unfaithful tribe of Dan,
replaced by Manasseh, still an issue of Joseph, as the tribe of Joseph.). All this denotes the first people
of God, composed as this people has been, with a specific election.”
Dan as the tribe of the Antichrist
The early church father Iraeneus took this idea from the Greek version of Jeremiah 8:16 solely on the
words, “The snorting of his horses was heard from Dan.” (Douglas) And in the apocryphal Testament
of Daniel, it states that Satan is that tribe's prince. Morris adds, “Dan's bad reputation may be quite old,
for this tribe (along with Zebulun) is omitted from the genealogies in the early chapters of I
Chronicles.”
Bruce responds to the above by stating: “But this roll-call of the tribes is schematic; we are not dealing
with a census tribe by tribe as in Num. 1:20ff.; 26:5ff., and need not be over-concerned about the
inclusion of Manasseh or the exclusion of Dan.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments