The identity of the “Ancient of Days” is an interesting question. Consider the following and you will notice that this title positively refers to both the Father and Christ. Verse 13 can only refer to the Father because, of course, the Son of Man who “came…before Him” is Christ. This has always been clear and has always been what we have taught. However, verse 22 can only refer to Christ. It is He that comes at the time that “judgment is given to the saints.” This cannot possibly be construed to mean the Father and this is exactly what the Church has always taught. Verse 9, we have always taught, PROBABLY refers to Christ, because this is an “Ancient of Days” that “did sit” at a time when other “thrones” were “cast down” (put in place, NKJV). This parallels verse 22 almost exactly, with the other thrones being those of the saints.
We have said that it might refer to the Father AS WELL, because the description of this Being could parallel the Father, as well as Christ. However, Ezekiel 1:15-21 describes the “wheels” that are part of what we have always believed was Christ’s Throne.
Isaiah 9:6 calls the One there, who is clearly Christ, “The Everlasting Father”—and yet we know that Christ is not “The Father.” We have always explained and understood this to mean that He is the “Father of Creation.” Verses 6 & 7, in Isaiah 9, could not possibly be construed to be anyone other than Christ. This is clear. Since we also know that Christ is Melchisedec (Heb. 7:1-17), and that verse 3 describes Melchisedec as “having neither beginning of days, nor end of life,” it is not then difficult to understand why He could also be considered “ancient” in days.