Interpreting the Prophecies of Daniel

In my experience, Adventists are too confident when asserting the validity of their interpretive schemes for Daniel and Revelation. This is especially true of cradle Adventists, who can hardly conceive the validity of any other scheme, let alone entertain them. Likewise, many converts to Adventism (including myself in years past) felt especially drawn to Adventism simply for the coherence of its prophetic scheme. Not surprisingly, I recurringly heard one question from my peers whenever the subject of my conversion to Catholicism came up:

"How do you explain the prophecies of Daniel?"

The above wasn't simply an inquiry into my religious thought; it had a rhetorical value, equivalent to: "how could you possibly deny the accuracy of our interpretations?" It expressed an ingrained presumption that no viable alternative so much as existed. I quickly learned that Daniel (of all books) gave many of my peers their most (seemingly) convincing evidence for remaining Adventist.

Naturally, my own thought on Daniel was hardly nailed down while I was still exploring Catholicism; even today, I am avidly reading various viewpoints and slowly developing my own conclusions. (The Catholic Church has rarely endorsed one prophetic reading over an another.) But the more and more I consider the question, the more I feel confirmed in advancing the conservative "Greek-view" of Daniel (in which the four kingdoms are identified as Babylon, Media, Persia, and Greece, and the little horn is equated with Antiochus Epiphanes). My Adventist readership is sure to scoff at this moment; nevertheless, I could not be more certain that they are mistaken.

I have developed the thesis that this scheme should be favored for Daniel 2 in an essay on diesdomini.com, which I ABSOLUTELY recommend:

The Hellenistic World as the Fourth Kingdom of Daniel 2: An Intratextual Defense of the Greek View

If you are certain I am wrong, I gladly invite you to test my reasoning. In that paper, I especially tend towards the prophetic schema of Robert J. M. Gurney, whose full-length study of the prophecies of Daniel were finally made available on the internet only yesterday (kudos to www.biblicalstudies.co.uk).

God is in Control: An Exposition of the Prophecies of Daniel, 2nd Edition.

Again, I heartily recommend exploring his work. Although I differ with Gurney on minor points, his synthesis of the data is most convincing. I would like, however, to develop my own variant perspectives in future DIES DOMINI essays, though feasible theses have not been forthcoming. Eventually, I suppose I will have to write essays defending Greek-view readings of Daniel 7 and 8 (likely in conversation with Dan 11), but those projects are also remote at this time. (In actuality, my views are so close to Gurney's that I hardly feel I have much new to contribute to the conversation.)

But, at least I have confirmed answers to those recurrent questions from yesteryear. ;-)