‘And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river.’ This is the man seen by Daniel at the start of the vision (10:5), who we conclude from Revelation 1, is the pre-incarnate Christ.
This is entirely consistent with what Peter tells us: ‘Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow’ (1 Peter 1:10-11). They looked into their own prophecies to see what the Spirit of God was saying through them. ‘They spoke better than they knew.’ The real author of Scripture is the Spirit of God, and the human authors sometimes did not understand their own prophecies. Where better to look for the meaning than in what God had said through them? How foolish therefore to limit their meaning to what they, the original authors, could understand, and to make this a rule of interpretation: that we should always try to limit the meaning of the text to what the original author understood. Quite apart from the fact that we do not know how much the original author understood – and therefore are at risk of making dangerous assumptions – we ought rather to be seeking the meaning of the divine author, not the human prophet through whom God spoke. Scripture must be allowed to interpret Scripture, and we gladly read back the truths revealed by later New Testament revelation into Old Testament revelation, because the one who spoke before knew what he was going to reveal later. Peter says prophecy transcends the human instrument through whom the prophecy is given: ‘For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost’ (2 Peter 1:21).