Daniel 13:56 Maoni

Let us pay attention, just as Joshua says, so that we can prevail over the Canaanites, because if they prevail over us and hold us captive, they may turn us from Israelites to Canaanites, just as it happened to him who was won over by the enticements of the flesh, to which the prophet said, “Race of Canaan and not of Judah, beauty has seduced you.” Let it not happen to us, therefore, that we hear, “race of Canaan,” because “cursed is the son of Canaan; he will be a servant to his brothers.” May the Lord instead grant that we may be children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, heirs according to the promise and brought forth from stones so that we may be children of Abraham, in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Salvation was awaited by and offered to Israel but not to the carnal Israel. “In fact, it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise who are considered his offspring.” As John also attests, the children of Abraham are not the children according to the flesh, since they are also children of vipers, and God can raise up children of Abraham from rocks. The Lord taught that the right of succession is constituted by works of faith and that we must not think of the birth of children according to carnal generation, when he says, “If you were children of Abraham, you would do the works that Abraham did.” And Daniel also, condemning the old men, does not say, “offspring of Abraham,” but, “offspring of Canaan and not of Judah.” Ezekiel also, confronting the people with their iniquities, says, “Your father was a Canaanite, your mother a Hittite. Your origin and your birth are of the land of Canaan.” We are not dealing, therefore, with this Israel that comes from carnal succession and to which is attributed the birth of a generation that is wholly profane because of its unbelief. It is not to this Israel, therefore, that salvation is given, because they did not accept it when it was offered, but to that other who, their slavery ended, has become the people of God.

Ham receives the sentence so that he might come to his senses, and he is punished through his son, so that you would learn that even if one is old, the punishment will pass to the child. And this makes his life bitter and painful, knowing that even after his death his son will be punished for what he did. And that the son will be miserable from birth and all his descendants detestable and inclined to evil is what the Scripture says instead of pronouncing a curse: “Your father was an Amorite and your mother a Hittite.” And elsewhere it says scornfully, “offspring of Canaan and not of Judah.”

Verses 54-59. "'Tell me under which tree thou sawest them conversing with each other.' And he answered, 'Under the mastic tree.' And Daniel said to him, 'Well hast thou lied against thine own head; for behold, the angel of God, having received His sentence from Him, shall cleave thee in twain.' And a little while later the other elder said, 'Under the holm tree.' And Daniel said to him, 'Well hast thou lied against thine own head; but the angel of the Lord waiteth with a sword to sever thee in twain.'" Since the Hebrews reject the story of Susanna, asserting that it is not contained in the Book of Daniel, we ought to investigate carefully the names of the trees, the skhinos and the prinos, which the Latins interpret as "holm-oak" and "mastic-tree," and see whether they exist among the Hebrews and what their derivation is - for example, as "cleavage" , and "cutting" or "sawing" is derived from "holm tree" in the language of the Greeks. But if no such derivation can be found, then we too are of necessity forced to agree with the verdict of those who claim that this chapter was originally composed in Greek, because it contains Greek etymology not found in Hebrew. But if anyone can show that the derivation of the ideas of cleaving and severing from the names of the two trees in question is valid in Hebrew, then we may accept this scripture also as canonical.