stephan huller

There can be no doubt that Montgomery is right about:

(a) that the 70 weeks was not originally connected with the birth of Jesus (after all Mark has no birth narrative and uses the section in its traditional context i.e. the destruction of the temple)
(b) the understand that it was connected with the birth of Jesus developed only in the late second century.

Mark's interpretation of the 70 weeks has nothing to do with the birth of Jesus. So what do the Fathers say? It is perhaps more accurate to say that Clement and Origen cite BOTH opinions. They make reference to the destruction of the temple AND the birth of Jesus. How this is reconciled is beyond me especially when Origen explicitly references both side by side.

Origen himself writes in another place "since the temple was destroyed, there exists no longer sacrifice, nor altar, nor priesthood… the weeks of years, also, which the prophet Daniel had predicted, extending to the leadership of Christ, have been fulfilled … [for] according to Daniel, seventy weeks were fulfilled until Christ the Ruler.” [De Principiis 4]

spin

I'm sure I've pointed out before the utter cretinousness of the sort of christian interpretation of Dan 9. It requires an ugly trick of adding the sixty-two weeks and the seven, as though there was no point in talking about them separately. The breakdown is actually:

[t2]7 weeks|from command to the anointed prince & building||
62 weeks|duration until the anointed one cut off; city destroyed by henchmen of a prince||
1 week|after 1/2 week sacrifice stopped - 1/2 week till end||
-----|-----------||
70 weeks|from command to end of time[/t2]
There are in fact two different people referred to as anointed. The first is a prince.

I've been impressed how easily the fudge of adding the 7 and the 62 together is sold nowadays. That way the two who are anointed can be conflated into one person.

maryhelena

Another method of getting to 70 c.e. with an interpretation of Daniel 9 is this:

The gospel storyline clearly implies a gap, a time difference, between an execution of a messiah/anointed figure and the destruction of the Jerusalem temple. This is relevant whether or not the gospel figure of JC was historical. If the gospel JC is executed shortly after the 15th year of Tiberius, then it’s a 40 year gap until 70 c.e. But a 40 year period is not connected with Daniel 9. It’s periods of 7 years that are relevant.

However, from the ahistoricst position, that gospel JC storyboard has been a developing storyboard. An earlier version of the gospel story ( re Eusebius and the Acts of Pilate) has an execution in the 7th year of Tiberius. Tiberius was co-ruler from 12 c.e. and sole ruler from 14 c.e. Counting from the 7th year sole rule of Tiberius in 21 c.e. there are 49 years until 70 c.e. i.e. 7 x7 years. A variation of Daniel ch.9 and it’s 70 weeks of years.

Interestingly, it could well be, for interpretations of Daniel 9, that the 7th and the 20th year of Tiberius are being paralleled with the 7th and the 20th years of Artaxerxes I. Since both the Artaxerxes 7th and 20th years are significant re the return of Jews to Jerusalem, re the rebuilding of the temple and the wall - it seems possible that the 7th and the 20th years of Tiberius have some connection to the building of the new, spiritual, intellectual, temple.

A 7th year of Tiberius from 12 c.e. is 19 c.e. - the time period in which the Josephan writer has placed the TF. - prior to or around the time some Jews were expelled from Rome. A 20th year, running from 12 c.e. is 32 c.e. around the gLuke and gJohn’s crucifixion time frame. A 20th year, running from 14 c.e. is 34 c.e. and the death, via Josephus, of Philip the Tetrarch.

(gLuke setting his story 70 years from 40 b.c. and Lysanias of Abilene - Antigonus becoming King and High Priest in that year)

The numbers in Daniel 9 can be utilized in many ways. Straightforward via a straight line of 490 years from the three relevant OT dates re the return of Jews from Babylon. Open-ended as a prophetic template or formula - that takes one wherever one seeks to go with one’s interpretation of Jewish history. Time moves on, cycles repeat themselves. No mystery here at all. It is we, ourselves, that make the mystery via interpretations of history.

History, as far as it can be established, is about facts, details, artifacts, coins etc. We can apply Daniel’s number system every which way; to historical events and to pseudo-history and to allegory etc – as in the gospel JC story. We only create the mystery when we fail to distinguish between the historical realities and our imagination, our imaginative retelling, storytelling, of history.

Jewish history has been retold within a prophetic time formula. I've no particular interest in numbers - maths was never my strong suit....The Irish retell their history in song.......now that's easier to hum along to...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHNHhQ1Q_nk

maryhelena

OK - I can run with that idea. One cutting off, an execution, and one not being executed. So, 1) the last King and High Priest, Antigonus, executed by Marc Antony. 2) the last King of Judea, Agrippa I, not executed...dying about 44 c.e. Which is around 490 years from the 20 th year of Artaxerxes 1.

footnote:

And the point of all this Daniel 9 stuff?

Basically; to attempt to demonstrate that what we have in the gospel JC story is a retelling, in mythological or allegorical or symbolic format - Hasmonean and Jewish history. History that is deemed, by those gospel writers to be relevant, in some form or another, to their theological speculations/ideas. In other words - relevant for 'salvation history'.

spin

[T2]Dan 8|Dan 9|Dan 11||
11 Yea, it magnified itself, even to the prince of the host;|26 And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing.|22 And the overwhelming forces shall be overwhelmed from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant.||
11c and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.|And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.|31 And forces shall stand on his part, and they shall profane the sanctuary,||
-|Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed.|-||
-|27 And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week,|23 And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully; for he shall come up, and shall become strong, with a small people.||
11b and it took away from him the continual burnt-offering,|and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering.|31c and shall take away the continual burnt-offering,||
13c and the transgression that maketh desolate, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?|And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate,|31d and they shall set up the abomination that maketh desolate.||
-|until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.|35 And some of them that are wise shall fall, to refine them, and to purify, and to make them white, even to the time of the end; because it is yet for the time appointed.[/T2]

maryhelena

OK - so lets play 'good cops' and 'bad cops' here....Daniel 9 and a king of the north and south scenario.:

Gospel pseudo-history re it's JC figure, executed around 30 c.e. by the Roman prefect Pilate. ( or around 33 if wanting to combine gLuke with gJohn..)

Hasmonean history: 70 years back from 30 c.e. is 40 b.c. and the l st year of the last King and High Priest of the Jews, Antigonus. Executed 3 years later in 37 b.c. by the Roman General, Marc Antony. The paid assassin hired by the Herodian, Herod the Great. (i.e. HG paid a great deal of money to MA....)

However, if it’s the 434 years that are of interest.....then lets do that with the three relevant OT dates regarding the return of Jews from Babylon to Jerusalem.

1) 434 years from 537 b.c. = 103 b.c. and Alexander Jannaeus and that troublesome story in the Toledot Yeshu.

2) 434 years from 458 b.c. (7th year of Artaxerxes I) is around 24 b.c. and the troublesome birth narrative in Slavonic Josephus around the 15th year of Herod the Great.

3) 434 years from 445 b.c. (20th year of Artaxerxes I) is 11 b.c. - that is 7 years to the death of Herod the Great in 4 b.c. In the middle of that week of 7 years, about 7 b.c., Herod the Great executed his two Hasmonean/Herodian sons, Alexander and Aristobulus. (according to the Josephan writer...)

It seems to me that whichever way one plays Daniel’s numbers game - its Hasmonean history that is involved....and it’s retelling, in a mythological or symbolic framework, i.e. a pseudo-history, within the gospel JC storyboard.

spin

A series of events circumscribed in seven years:

[T2]-|Dan 8|Dan 9|Dan 11||
*|11 Yea, it magnified itself, even against the prince of the host;|26 And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing.|22 And the overwhelming forces shall be overwhelmed from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant.||
*|11c and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.|And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.|31 And forces shall stand on his part, and they shall profane the sanctuary,||
-|-|Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed.|-||
-|-|27 And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week,|23 And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully; for he shall come up, and shall become strong, with a small people.||
*|11b and it took away from him the continual burnt-offering,|and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering.|31c and shall take away the continual burnt-offering,||
*|13c and the transgression that makes desolate, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?|And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate,|31d and they shall set up the abomination that maketh desolate.||
-|-|until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.|35 And some of them that are wise shall fall, to refine them, and to purify, and to make them white, even to the time of the end; because it is yet for the time appointed.[/T2]

maryhelena

OK, spin - very nice chart - but where are you taking it for a ride?? Interpretations are the game plan here. Many ways, so the saying goes, to skin a cat. Daniel 9 is a moving side-show. Apply it here, apply it there - all the way from that Degree of Cyrus to Bar Kokhbar - and beyond for those still waiting....and waiting...

We seek him here, we seek him there,
Those historicists seek him everywhere.
Is he in heaven? — Is he in hell?
That damned, elusive Anointed One...

(with apologies to Baroness Orczy)

spin

Read.

maryhelena

175 b.c. is 434 years from 609 b.c. - and that year was the exile, to Egypt of Jehoahaz of Judah.

An application of the Daniel 9 weeks of years to prior to the Degree of Cyrus?

Methinks the worst thing to be doing with interpreting OT prophecy is to get stuck with any one interpretation - as though that one interpretation was the 'true' interpretation. History move on - and that necessitates a re-working, a re-using of whatever numbers one decides are the big deal. Prediction is a pot-luck pastime - prophecy, prophetic writing, is a game plan. It's always open to re-interpretation. Historical, allegorically, symbolically, spiritually - whatever.

Daniel's 70 weeks of years allows for an ongoing reapplication of those years to various historical situation - and gospel wise, pseudo-historical or 'salvation history'.

What all this does indicate is that the gospel JC storyboard is not a historizating of Paul's cosmic christ figure. Rather it is a symbolic or allegorical re-telling of Hasmonean and Jewish history. It's history that is calling the 'tune' here not Pauline flights of intellectual/spiritual speculation. That's the after-story. The baseline story, on the ground so to speak, is historical Hasmonean and Jewish reality. And what else should one expect - it's a very Jewish story is it not? 'Salvation history'.