When doing Bible translation, in addition to consulting grammars, lexicons, commentaries, and Bible software programs, for each verse I also reference the following mostly formal equivalence translations:

ASV – American Standard Version
DBY – English Darby Bible
ERV – English Revised Version
ESV – English Standard Version
JPS – Jewish Publication Society
KJV – King James Version
NAB – New American Bible
NASB – New American Standard Bible
NET – New English Translation
NKJV – New King James Version
NRSV – New Revised Standard Version
RSV – Revised Standard Version
TNK – JPS Tanakh
YLT – Young’s Literal Translation

I reference these Bible versions to see how close the English corresponds to the syntax of the original languages. The SPV goes further than any of the above versions with regard to syntactic precision. If you want to have confidence in knowing that the English has a syntactic equivalent in the original, then the SPV will satisfy your needs.

Because of my number one priority in maintaining syntactic precision to the original languages, if you the reader see a translation in the SPV that does not correspond to the original, please provide the necessary evidence for the correct syntactic translation and I will then make the appropriate changes.

In May 2009 I corrected numerous grammatical errors in and made some additional improvements to John Peters’s manuscript The Mystery of the Daily, with the approval of John Peters.

Therefore this is the most up-to-date version of The Mystery of the Daily.  Download this updated version below, and send it to as many people as you know who are interested in Daniel 8:9-14 and Bible prophecy.

The Mystery of the Daily 2009 version

Since the appearance of John Peters’s manuscript The Mystery of the Daily, it has gotten the attention of the Biblical Research Institute (BRI). Dr. Gerhard Pfandl, associate director of BRI, in July 2005 wrote a critique to Peters’s manuscript, concluding that Peters’s thesis that “the daily” represented the self-exalting character of paganism was “exegetically and contextually not viable.”

A month later, Peters wrote a response to Pfandl’s critique, concluding that Pfandl “selectively cited some evidence from the manuscript but he omitted an abundance of stronger evidence.” After receiving Peters’s response, Pfandl has been unable to provide a further rebuttal to Peters’s response.

In July 2009 I became involved in the exchange between Pfandl and Peters. I also provided a response to Pfandl’s critique. However rather than producing my own personal response separately, I simply added my input to Peters’s response. After examining Pfandl’s critique, Peters’s presentation of Daniel 8:9-14 still stands as the best exegesis to date.

I have provided each of the three responses below:

Gerhard Pfandl’s July 2005 critique of John Peters

John Peters’s August 2005 response to Gerhard Pfandl

Jeffrey Ho’s July 2009 response to Gerhard Pfandl

I am pleased to add a study entitled The Mystery of the Daily: An Exegesis of Daniel 8:9-14. It is a manuscript written by John W. Peters in 1992. I came across this manuscript in 2002 and was immediately immersed in the academic technicality of it, in which I was particularly fascinated by the usage of Hebrew and linguistics used to exegete these verses. As a result of my exposure to this academic paper, I began to study the original Biblical languages because I believed it would unlock truths from the original text which I would not have gotten otherwise from an English translation. Ultimately, the linguistic nature of this manuscript motivated me to commence with Bible translation based on strict grammatical precision, a principle which proved the utmost importance in the correct translation and exegesis of Daniel 8:9-14.

While preterists change and add to the Hebrew text of Daniel 8:9-14 so much in order to force Antiochus IV Epiphanes as the only fulfillment of it, an extremely literal and grammatical translation of these verses with no changes to the Hebrew text shows that Antiochus cannot be the fulfillment at all, but rather the Roman power. Regarding “the continuity” in verses 11, 12, and 13, it is definitely not the erroneous view among preterists which states that “the continuity” refers to the continual burnt offerings which Antiochus took away for 3.5 years, nor is it the popular but misguided view among historicists which states that “the continuity” refers to Christ’s high priestly ministry in heaven. Taking and refining the lead from William Miller and Uriah Smith of the 19^th century, Peters shows that “the continuity” is the self-magnifying character of paganism inherent within each pagan kingdom starting with Medo-Persia and ending with the 1^st and 2^nd phase Roman power. This is evident by the continued use of the Hebrew keyword gadal (to become great) which is applied to each of the four earthly powers. Therefore, while the translations “the continual [burnt offering]” and “the continual [high priestly ministry of Christ]” have no linguistic basis within 8:9-14, the translation “the continuity” with the meaning of self-magnifying character of paganism does within 8:3-14.

After looking at both preterist and historicist commentaries, The Mystery of the Daily currently stands as the best exegesis of Daniel 8:9-14 to date. I strongly recommend all who have an interest in Bible prophecy to read and study this paper in its entirety, because “the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” Revelation 19:10.

The main reason for producing a new Bible translation is to finally have a translation that, for the first time in history since the time of the prophet Daniel, corresponds with the present truth. The present truth for our times is that the greatest threat in the book of Daniel is the Roman power in its second phase. All other translations which have ever been made is based on the incorrect premise that the obscure Greek Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who lived in the second century B.C., is the chief threat in the book of Daniel, and this is most notable in the key passage in Daniel 8:9–14 where all other translations add in words which are not in the original Hebrew text to make it look like Antiochus took away the continual [burnt offering] or the continual [sacrifice] during his persecution of the Jews in Jerusalem. These erroneous additions change the intended meaning of the text, and so have no right to exist. Daniel purposely wrote the word by itself as “the continuity” with no other qualifiers, because “the continuity” does not indicate the Jewish burnt offerings, but rather something that is inherent throughout the entire vision proper of Daniel 8:3–12. The proper interpretation is that the second-phase Roman power is present in all of Daniel 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12; not Antiochus IV Epiphanes. With this proper interpretation, never again should one apply all the events in the book of Daniel as ending in the 2nd century B.C. But rather the genuinely divine prophecies given to Daniel by God span the entire course of history from the time of the prophet Daniel, to the baptism and death of Jesus Christ, to the setting up of the second-phase Roman power, to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ and beyond. Therefore, the prophecies in the book of Daniel have enormous salvational implications for the Christian believer today, because the present truth for our times is that “the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” Revelation 19:10.