In fact, it troubled Daniel so much that he took a few men and mourned for three weeks, fasted nice foods and did not annoint himself with lotion. Sometime near the end of Daniel’s fast, a man appears to him which leaves Daniel quivering and helpless. The man is described as:
The bible does not indicate who this person is, and while the first reading of the description makes me think that this could in fact be the Son of God, it is my conclusion that this is another angel sent to Daniel for reasons I’ll come on to later. However, I could be wrong on that one…
Daniel goes a bit giddy at this point and falls onto the ground into a deep sleep. The man strengthens Daniel and asks him to stand for he is about to say something to him. The man reminds Daniel once again that he is highly esteemed and that the reason he has come is because Daniel “set his mind to gain understanding and humble youself before God”.
Then the man says something quite interesting - he indicates that he was “resisted by the prince of the Persian kingdom” and detained there for 21 days (3 weeks). My study notes tell me that this probably refers to a demon exercising influence over the Persian kingdom in the interests of Satan - although other commentaries suggest that he may be directly referring to Cambyses (or an agent of Satan working through Cambyses), the son of Cyrus. Whilst the man was detained for a time, he was eventually helped by the archangel Michael so that he could come and talk to Daniel.
If any of you have read any of Frank Peretti’s books (such as This Present Darkness) then this will sound quite familiar to you as Peretti writes fictional stories but with the slant of seeing them with the actions of angels and demons in mind. The bible tells us that our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against powers and principalities and it leads me to my conclusion that this man was an angel of heaven - as I find it hard to believe that the Son of God could be held by a prince of Satan and needed help to be released from his power.
Another interesting thing that strikes me is that the man was held by the prince of Persia for 21 days. The man indicates in v12 that he is coming in response to Daniels anguish but could not come instantly because of the resistence from the prince of Persia. So often when I pray and don’t see their fruits instantly I all too often fall into the trap of thinking that my prayers have fallen on Gods ‘bad ear’ and get discouraged. However, in this case the man was coming to answer Daniel - but the heavenly struggle prevented it happening straight away. This comes as an encouragement to me to keep praying for the things which I am not seeing immediate results - for the prayers I may be praying could be affecting the unseen actions of the heavenly armies even though I see no eartly result. As was the case here, the prayers I am praying now may have already been answered (or are being answered) and I may just not be seeing it right now.
The man then proceeds to give Daniel strength as he seems to be slightly lacking in that department before starting to unfold to him the reason why he came to speak to him. That signals the end of this chapter so we will leave it there for now and let the comments begin…






6:05 pm
Another in depth look into Daniel, and we’re well into the prophetic half of the book. This is where i get confused, though, because there appear to be quite a few instances where Daniel is receiving visions but the confirmation doesn’t come for some time (if at all). If Daniel was seeing something as important and troubling as a war, then wouldn’t it make sense that God might reveal to him sooner rather than later what it is that he is seeing. If the man who came to Daniel was an angel, it comes as an encouragement that God has stationed his workers in the heavenlies to work as mediation between us and Him.
Also, Daniel has “set his mind to gain understanding and humble youself before Godâ€, and has thus been blessed with the presence of and angel to encourage him. Encouragement indeed, although i understand that the book of Daniel has been the subject of some fierce debate, particularly around it’s authenticity. I believe the historical start of the book and prophetic second half appear to indicate a change in style, hence the debate. I can’t put every point in here, but it is certainly an engaging and challenging account. Good work, Gaz