The pivotal question, upon which depends the identification of the "daily" (hattamid), is directly related to the antecedent of mimmennu (from him) in Dn. 8:11: "Even unto to the Prince of the host he exalted himself, and from him the daily was lifted up...". Is the daily lifted up from: 1) the Prince of the host or 2) the one exalting himself? Alternatively does "from him" refer to the Prince of the host or the one exalting himself? Sufficient exegetical evidence has already been presented strongly suggesting that the antecedent of mimmennu is the "one exalting himself" or Rome in its pagan phase. However, overwhelming support for this conclusion derives from Daniel's use of cultic language and symbols taken from the "typical" sanctuary service recorded in Leviticus and Numbers. It is immediately evident, as previously demonstrated, that the ram, goat, and horn in Daniel 8 are all counterfeit cultic symbols which strongly suggests the further use of counterfeit cultic symbols and language in this chapter of Daniel. One specific phrase in Dn. 8:11 has unusual significance: "from him was lifted up the daily." This phrase consists of three Hebrew words which are used repeatedly in the worship setting of Leviticus and Numbers. The three root words include min or mimmennu (from, or from him), rum (lift up) hattamid (the daily). More specifically the phrase "he shall lift up (rum: root) from it (mimmennu)" is utilized a total of five times in Leviticus: four times in the active voice (2:9; 4:8; 4:19; 6:15) and once in the passive voice in 4:10 (it is lifted up from the ox of the sacrifice). In three occurrences the cultic priest lifts up from the cultic beast sacrifice (ram, goat, bull, lamb) the fat which is then burned as incense. For example, in Lev. 4:19, "and he shall lift up (rum) all its fat from it (mimmennu) and shall burn it as incense on the altar. In the other two occurrences (Lev. 2:9 & 6:15) the cultic priest lifts up from the cultic food offering a portion of the flour (a memorial offering) which is then burned as incense on the altar. For example in Lev. 6:15, "he (priest) shall lift up from it his handful of the flour of the food offering and of its oil and all the frankincense which (is) on the food offering and shall burn it as incense on the altar, a sweet fragrance, as a memorial offering to Jehovah." In all five cases where this cultic linguistic phrase, employing mimmennu and rum, is used the item which is lifted up from cultic offering is always burned as incense (qamar) as a sweet aroma to Jehovah.74 The cultic language and activity in the five passages in Leviticus are contrasted with the cultic language in Dn.8:11 in the following two tables respectively.
Cultic Language Parallels in Leviticus and Daniel
--------------------------------------------------------
Lv.4:8 Lv.4:10 Lv.4:19 Lv.2:9 Lv.6:15 Dn.8:11
-------- --------- --------- -------- --------- --------
rum rum rum rum rum rum
mimmennu min mimmennu min mimmennu mimmennu
heleb heleb heleb azkarah solet hattamid
Cultic Activity Parallels in Leviticus and Daniel
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Lv.4:8 Lv.4:10 Lv.4:19 Lv.2:9 Lv.6:15 Dn.8:11
----------- --------- ----------- --------- --------- -----------
Hi Priest Hi Priest Hi Priest Hi Priest Hi Priest Hi Priest
lifts up lifts up lifts up lifts up lifts up lifts up
from cultic from ox from cultic from food from food from cultic
beast beast offering offering beast
the fat the fat the fat memorial flour "the daily"
offering
The striking parallels of the language and activity in Leviticus with Daniel 8:11 are unmistakable. The genuine priest is replaced by a counterfeit priest (papal Rome); the genuine cultic beast sacrifice is replaced by a counterfeit beast sacrifice (pagan Rome); and the genuine portion of the offering (fat or flour) is replaced by the counterfeit hattamid (the daily).
The pivotal question, "what is the antecedent of mimmennu?" or alternatively, "is the daily lifted up from the Prince of the host or the one exalting himself?" is unequivocally answered by the cultic language parallels with Leviticus. Just as the "fat" is lifted from the cultic beast sacrifice so the hattamid must be lifted from the counterfeit cultic beast sacrifice. (The nature of hattamid will be clarified in the next section.) The term, Prince of the host, conveys not the slightest hint of cultic significance. Although sar (prince, ruler, commander) inherently possesses no cultic or cultic sacrificial significance, it may be used in conjunction with cultic terms such as rulers of the sanctuary (Is. 43:28) just as it is used in conjunction with other categories such as rulers of the soldiers, rulers of the cupbearers, rulers of a prison or rulers of the host. Moreover, sar possesses not a trace of counterfeit cultic significance in Daniel 8 which would be demanded by the cultic-counterfeit cultic parallels of Leviticus and Daniel 8 respectively. Nowhere in the cultic language of the sanctuary service in Exodus, Leviticus or Numbers does a princely ruler play a cultic role.
On the other hand, the "one exalting himself" or the horn from littleness exhibits clear cultic significance. Indeed, the horn from littleness derives from the four winds of heaven to which the four horns of the goat grew great from the broken horn of the goat (Dn. 8:8-9). By implication the horn from littleness is directly associated with the counterfeit cultic goat symbol or cultic beast sacrifice. The horn from littleness thus symbolizes a new cultic beast power derived indirectly from the cultic goat (beast) power by way of the four winds of heaven. This new cultic beast power or sacrificial beast, the horn from littleness, is analogous and parallel to the cultic sacrificial beast in Lev. 4:8, 10 & 19 from which the priest lifts up the fat. Hence, the antecedent of mimmennu ("from him") in Dn. 8:11 is the cultic beast power/sacrifice symbolized by the horn from littleness or Rome in its pagan phase; and from him the "daily" is lifted up. Pagan Rome represents a counterfeit cultic sacrifice since it yields to (is sacrificed) and is replaced by papal Rome. This conclusion reinforces the view that the dragon who represents pagan Rome in Rev. 13:2 gives the beast (papal Rome) his throne, power, and great authority.
The counterfeit cultic language and activity of Dn. 8:11 which is parallel to the genuine cultic activity of Leviticus provides conclusive and decisive evidence that the hattamid is lifted up not from the Prince of the host but from the cultic beast power/sacrifice symbolized by the horn from littleness or Rome in its pagan phase. The cultic language parallels of Leviticus with Daniel 8 demand that "the daily" be lifted up from the cultic beast symbol in Dn. 8:11. The counterfeit cultic language confirms the pagan/papal identification by gender distinction in Section 5.0.
7.1 Identification of Hattamid
From a surface examination of cultic language and activity parallels in the previous tables, there appears to be no cultic-counterfeit cultic connection between the fat which is lifted up from the cultic sacrifice and the daily (hattamid) which is lifted up from the cultic beast sacrifice in Dn. 8:11. The following discussion will establish the relationship and the connecting link between the up-lifted fat and "the daily" which is lifted up. Throughout the discussion it must be recognized that when the priest lifted up the fat from the sacrifice to the altar of burnt offering, it was burned as incense and always resulted in a sweet aroma to Jehovah (eg. see Lev. 3:5, 16; 4:10; 4:31; 17:6; Num. 18:17).
7.1.1 The Burnt Offering
The continual burnt offering is first described in Ex. 29:38-46 and consisted of two lambs, one each offered in the morning and evening along with the grain (food) offering and drink offering. It was a sweet aroma to Jehovah and it was a reminder that He would meet with the children of Israel, that the tabernacle would be sanctified by His glory, that He would dwell with them and that Jehovah redeemed them from Egypt to dwell among them. It may be observed that the adjective, tamid (daily), describing the burnt offering is connected with the sweet aroma (Ex. 29:41-42).
Further instructions for the continual burnt offering are given in Lev. 6:8-13 where the fat of the peace offerings is burned together on and with the burnt offering itself (6:12) both of which were a sweet aroma to Jehovah. The simultaneous burning of the fat of the peace offering upon the burnt offering itself as a sweet aroma to Jehovah is also specifically directed by God to Moses in Lev. 3:3-5 and performed in Lev. 9:22-24 (see also Lev. 8:25-28). It is noted that the detailed description of the burnt offering in Lev. 6:8-13 suggests that the burnt offering commenced in the evening. "This is the law of the burnt offering; it is the burnt offering on the hearth on the altar all the night until the morning and the fire is kept burning on it" (6:9). In the morning the ashes were removed and the fire was kept burning with new wood every morning followed by a new burnt offering in the morning (6:12). In Ex. 29:39 and Num. 28:4, it is simply stated that one lamb is offered in the morning and the other lamb offered in the evening which does not necessarily imply a commencing-ending sequence. Conversely, the description of the evening-morning sequence is a prominent feature in Lev. 6:9-12. The importance of the evening-morning sequence will be discussed in Section 8.2, "The Cultic Significance of 2300 evening-morning." The third description of the daily burnt offering appears in Num. 28:3-8 which is nearly identical to that in Ex. 29:38-46. Again the burning of the continual (tamid) burnt offering along with the food offering results in a sweet aroma to Jehovah (Num. 28:6).
7.1.2 The Grain Offering
The grain offering (minchah) represented a gift to God which expressed submission and dependence. Originally signifying a gift to any superior, "at the time of Sinai minchah became the official designation for a gift to God, a gift of homage, an acknowledgment of the superiority of the One to whom the gift was given." Thus, man showed himself to be a steward of the things entrusted him.
The grain offerings could be either private, voluntary offerings of individuals (see Lev. 2) or the continual grain offering, a public offering made before Jehovah (Lev. 6:14-23) in the same way that the burnt offering could be private or public (Lev. 6:8-13; Num. 28:3-8). For the public grain offering (Lev. 6:14-23), the priest lifted up a handful of fine flour from the grain offering with its oil and frankincense which was burned on the altar as a sweet aroma to Jehovah. The private, individual grain offering was offered by the priest in a similar manner and for the same purpose (Lev. 2:2, 9).
The law of the grain offering (minchah) in Lev. 6:14-23 consisted of a tenth of a ephah of flour as a continual (tamid) grain offering, half in the morning and half at night for a sweet aroma to Jehovah. Again it may be observed that the flour as a daily (tamid) grain offering is connected with the sweet aroma to Jehovah (6:20-21).
Finally the burnt offering was combined most frequently with the grain offering as a sweet aroma to Jehovah. The two male lambs as a tamid (daily) burnt offering were always combined with the flour as a daily grain offering for a sweet aroma to Jehovah (Num. 28:4-8; 29:6). Again the connection of the tamid (daily) is observed.
7.1.3 Hattamid /Sweet Aroma Connection
The Hebrew word hattamid (the daily) never occurs in the OT as an isolated substantive without adjectival designation except for the five occurrences in Daniel (8:11, 12, 13; 11:31; 12:11). Hattamid appears sixteen times in the book of Numbers and twice in Nehemiah but always with adjectival designation in three configurations: the daily burnt offering (15 times); the daily grain offering (2 times); and the continual bread (1 time).
7.1.3.1 Hattamid Burnt Offering
In the cultic worship symbolism of Numbers, hattamid is most frequently connected with the daily burnt offering (14 of 16 occurrences which all appear in Num. 28 & 29. As previously described, two male lambs were offered as a tamid (daily) burnt offering which were a sweet aroma to Jehovah (Num. 28:1-8). Although the adjective tamid is used, the context of Num. 28 & 29 where hattamid is specifically used 14 times make it clearly understood that this represented the daily (hattamid) burnt offering. In Num. 29:6 hattamid is directly connected with the sweet aroma of the daily burnt offering.
7.1.3.2 Hattamid Grain Offering
The grain offering is directly connected with hattamid only in Num. 4:16; but it is linked with the daily (hattamid) burnt offering in eleven (11) occurrences in Num. 28 & 29. Specifically in Num. 29:6 the daily (hattamid) burnt offering is combined with the grain offering (hattamid grain offering is implied) which are both linked in the offering as a sweet aroma to Jehovah.
7.1.3.3 Hattamid Bread
Hattamid is used only once in adjectival designation of the bread (continual bread) or bread of presence or shewbread in Num 4:7. However the preparation of the bread of the tabernacle, described in Lev. 24:5-9, included frankincense which was placed on the bread for a memorial offering made by fire to Jehovah. The bread was set before Jehovah continually (tamid) every Sabbath with the frankincense which was burned as an offering to Jehovah. The burning of the frankincense (sweet aroma implied) in effect made the continual bread an offering made by fire to Jehovah (24:7-9).
The foregoing discussion establishes the linkage of hattamid with the sweet aroma in the cultic worship setting of Leviticus and Numbers. The linkage is established without exception in all 16 occurrences of hattamid whether it is the burnt offering (14 times), the grain offering (1 time) or the continual bread offering (1 time). Furthermore, the use of tamid with the continual burnt offering in Num. 28:3, 6 & 23 and the grain offering in Lev. 6:20 also establishes the linkage of tamid with sweet aroma of these offerings. Moreover, it has been established that the sweet aroma is also linked with the fat lifted up from the cultic beast offerings which was always burned as incense to Jehovah on the altar of burnt offering. A similar linkage of the sweet aroma with the grain offerings was also established. Thus it is seen that the memorial portion (fat or fine flour) lifted up from the cultic offering may be equated to hattamid which is also associated with the cultic offerings by the connecting link of the sweet aroma illustrated in the diagram below.
The cultic beast sacrifice in Leviticus has its counterfeit parallel with the cultic beast symbolized by the horn in Daniel 8. Likewise, the fat lifted up from the cultic sacrifice in Leviticus and burned as a sweet aroma has its counterfeit parallel with the cultic hattamid lifted up from the counterfeit cultic beast power (horn from littleness).
Sweet aroma
----------------------------------
Fat Hattamid
---------------- -----------------
Cultic Sacrifice Burnt Offering
Sin Offering Food Offering
Peace Offering Shewbread-Incense
It now has been established that the cultic hattamid in Leviticus and Numbers is always linked with the sweet aroma associated with the cultic sacrifice made by fire to Jehovah. Hence, it appears that it can be concluded with certainty that the link which connects the fat lifted up from the cultic beast sacrifice in Leviticus with hattamid lifted up from the counterfeit cultic beast power (horn) in Dn. 8:11 is the sweet aroma. Thus, the counterfeit cultic hattamid in Dn. 8 is identified as a counterfeit sweet aroma. Moreover, the identification of a counterfeit hattamid in Dn. 8:11 as being equivalent to a counterfeit sweet aroma confirms that the antecedent mimmennu (from him) in Dn. 8:11 is not the Prince of the host but is none other than the horn exalting himself against the Prince of the host.
7.2 Counterfeit Hattamid /Sweet Aroma
When the Jewish mind heard the word hattamid, he certainly associated it with the sweet aroma to Jehovah resulting from a spirit of self-sacrifice, full consecration, and constant dependence upon the atoning blood of Christ, which is acceptable to God. The words "sweet aroma" express in characteristic human language the thought that God was well pleased with the offering and accepted the one presenting it.
The substantive hattamid used in the cultic setting of Numbers was principally associated with the cultic burnt offering and corresponding sweet aroma (14 of 16 occurrences). The sweet aroma of the burnt offering which was ordained at Sinai (Num. 28:6) was a continual reminder that Jehovah brought the Israelites out of the land of Egypt to dwell among them (Ex. 29:46). As they identified in heart and spirit with the purpose of the corporate daily burnt offering, a humble and contrite response of thankfulness rang through their hearts.
The counterfeit cultic symbolism in Dn. 8 confirms a counterfeit cultic hattamid in 8:11 which is linked with a counterfeit sweet aroma both of which are derived from the cultic language of Leviticus and Numbers. The counterfeit "daily" (hattamid) is characterized by a repugnant aroma, not a sweet aroma, resulting from self-exalting rebellion against God which the Bible calls the "mystery of iniquity" (2 Thes. 2:7). The contrasting characteristics of the genuine and counterfeit hattamid are summarized in the following table.
Charavteristics of HA TAMID
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Genuine Counterfeit
---------------------------- ------------------------------------------
1. Sweet Aroma 1. Repugnant Aroma
- burnt offering - false sacrifice
- food offering - Baal worship
- fat burned - as incense
2. Contrite Heart 2. Self Exaltation
- humility Ex.29:46 - Dn. 8:11
3. Pure Offering 3. Blemished Offering
- no blemish Lv.1:10, 13 - Mal.1:13-14
4. Pure Incense 4. False Incense
- continual incense Ex. 30:8 - false incense Is.65:3; Jer.32:29
- Baal Worship
5. "Agape" Motivation 5. Motivation: Hope of Reward & Exaltation
Flowing From Slain Lamb
Rebellion against God manifested by disobedience and false worship practices results in Jehovah's refusal to condone the incense altars and to smell the "sweet aroma" of false worship (Lev. 26:30-31). Through Isaiah, Jehovah cautioned Judah: "I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams and the fat of cattle. Bring no more futile sacrifices; incense is an abomination to Me" (Is. 1:11, 13; see also Amos 5:21-22).
Jehovah abhors attempts to offer sweet incense to idols (Baal worship) declaring He will lay waste the altars, break the idols, and cut down the high places (Eze. 6: 4-6, 13; see also Hos. 11:2). Baal worship is repeatedly associated with burning incense to Baal in Jeremiah upon which Jehovah pronounces doom. Finally, the contrast between genuine worship of a contrite spirit and false worship with counterfeit sacrifices and incense is set forth in Is. 66:2-3, "But on this one I will look; on him who is poor and of a contrite spirit, and who trembles at My word. He who kills a bull is as if he slays a man; he who sacrifices a lamb, as if he breaks a dog's neck; he who offers a grain offering as if he offers swine's blood; he who burns incense, as if he blesses the idol. They did evil before My eyes, and chose that in which I do not delight." The continual (tamid) persistence in counterfeit worship of Baal by those who sacrifice in gardens and burn incense on altars of brick, and who represent themselves as holier than their neighbor is condemned by Jehovah in Is. 65:3-6 where tamid is linked directly with counterfeit incense.
The scriptural evidence supports the conclusion that the counterfeit cultic hattamid or sweet aroma in Dn. 8:11 is intimately associated with Baal worship of pagan and papal Rome in which the latter lifts up hattamid from the former.
7.3 Counterfeit Priesthood
The cultic language parallels in Leviticus 2:9; 4:8, 10, 19; and 6:15 with Dn. 8:11 reveal that the priest lifts up (rum) from the cultic sacrifice a memorial portion (fat or fine flour) to be burned as incense for a sweet aroma before Jehovah. The parallel cultic language in Dn. 8:11 reveal that a counterfeit hattamid, or sweet aroma of Baal worship, is lifted up from a counterfeit beast/power sacrifice. The cultic language in the five texts in Leviticus clearly identifies the priest who lifts up (rum) the fat or handful of flour from the cultic offering. The existence of a counterfeit cultic priest is apparent in Dn. 8:11 by both cultic language parallels with Leviticus and also by the passive voice of rum (huraym) which implies an active voice counterpart of a priest. Thus the phrase, "from him was lifted up the daily," implies three counterfeit cultic significations: 1) a cultic sacrifice (from him), 2) a cultic memorial portion of the sacrifice burned as incense for a sweet aroma (hattamid) and 3) a cultic priest who lifts up hattamid (active voice subject of rum). The chart below summarizes the cultic parallel of Leviticus and Dn. 8:11.
Cultic Parallels
-----------------------------------------------
Leviticus Daniel 8:11
--------- ------------------------
1. Priest 1. Counterfeit Priest
2. Sacrifice 2. Counterfeit Sacrifice
----------------- ---------
3. | Fat or Memorial | 3. | Hatamid |
| Offering | | |
----------------- ---------
| |
| -------------------- |
==| Link = Sweet Aroma |==
| -------------------- |
| |
-------------- ---------------------
| True Worship | | Counterfeit Worship |
-------------- ---------------------
It may be recalled that the cultic beast power/sacrifice is represented by the horn from littleness or Rome in its pagan phase who exalts himself against the Prince of the host. The historical record shows that with the first Caesar, Octavian (Augustus; 31 BC-AD 14), the emperor cult began in Rome. Octavian's position was strengthened by the elevation of his adoptive father Caesar, at the Senate's decree, to a place among the deities. "Thus Octavian called himself son of the divine Caesar, imperator Caesar divi filius." Octavian added to his name the one of "Augustus," emphasizing the unique dignity of his position. Until that time this designation (meaning "the exalted one"; see also Dn. 8:11, "he exalted himself") had been employed only as surname of deities.
He thus conveyed the impression that his position of power was of incomparable loftiness. "The highest priestly office of the pontifex maximus was transferred to Augustus in 12 BC by popular referendum, and in 2 BC the list of honorary titles was expanded when Augustus was designated by the Senate as pater patriae" (father of fathers). The title of pontifex maximus was carried by Roman Caesars including emperor Constantine, as chief priest of the pagan state religion, while still professing Christianity and setting apart the day of the sun (Sunday) as a day of rest and worship.
From the historical record and the scriptural evidence, it may be concluded that the daily (hattamid) which was lifted up by the counterfeit priest (papal Rome) from the counterfeit cultic beast/sacrifice (pagan Rome) included not only self-exalting counterfeit worship, (false sweet aroma) but also included the priestly ministry of pagan Rome. Indeed, the pagan title pontifex maximus was formally assumed by papal Rome from the fifteenth century onwards from its forbearer pagan Rome which inherited the priesthood from all previous pagan societies. Although used by both bishops and popes, today it is confined to the Roman pontiff.
Although the substantive hattamid with the adjectival designation is never used as a direct modifier of the cultic priestly ministry in the OT, the adjective tamid is used in an indirect association with the high priestly ministry of Aaron in Ex. 28:29-30 in bearing the names of the sons of Israel on the breastplate before Jehovah continually. In Ex. 28:39 the high priest, while ministering, wore a gold headband continually, engravened with "Holiness to Jehovah". Further associations of tamid with the ministry of the priests and the Levites are found in 1 Chron. 16:37, 40; 23:31; 2 Chron. 24:14. Thus, it may be inferred that the counterfeit hattamid lifted up from the counterfeit beast/sacrifice or pagan Rome included not only a counterfeit sweet aroma of self-exalting false worship but also a counterfeit self-exalting priesthood lifted by papal Rome from pagan Rome's priesthood (pontifex maximus).
Since the counterfeit beast sacrifice symbolized by the horn or pagan Rome exhibits a self-proclaimed priesthood (pontifex maximus), it becomes readily apparent that the "place of his sanctuary" (miqdash) in Dn. 8:11 is in reality the pontifex maximus' (pagan Rome's) counterfeit sanctuary located in Rome (place or habitation). The habitation (makon) of his (pagan Rome's) sanctuary was displaced from Rome to Constantinople in AD 330.