Diogenes the Cynic

Let me ask again. when are you dating Daniel?

Jim Larmore

Yes it is , look at any greek interlinear Bible and see how it spells the apocalyse

Jim Larmore

I do see a lot of reasons and by making this statement you show a flare for ignoring evidence, but think about what you have just agreed to here. If Daniel was canonized by the maccabean conflict and I can show by evidence thru Josephus Flavious and Jesus Sirat that Daniel existed way before that. This prophecy still pre-dates the fulfillment of the dates when Jesus' ministry started by what 170 years? Canonization takes a lot of time, if Daniel was in the dead sea scrolls at Qumran then it probably existed for no less than 300 years prior to their discovery.

But we do much better than that even if we look at some solid evidence.

Amaleq13

Wouldn't the 15th year of Tiberius' reign (14-37) be 29CE?

Is it reasonable to suggest God has a margin of error in providing prophetic information?

An error of a couple years is impressive for a human guess but it is "somewhat" less impressive coming from an allegedly omniscient entity.

I'm also not clear on why the alleged start of Jesus' ministry, rather than his birth, should be considered the intended target year of the prophecy.

Lafcadio

This is a very clumsy matching, IMO.
First, you have tribes like those of lombards (longobards) that descended into Italy in 6th century AD (on byzantine's call) whose involvement in Western Roman Empire's fall is nil or close to nil.
Second, you ignore a lot of tribes of those times: jutes, alans, huns and gepids are first that come to my mind.

Siricius (though Damasus I was before him) is called usually the first pope and he's bishop of Rome (bishop of Rome were before him, too) and that happens in late IVth century.
But I assume you consider special this pope (Vigilius) which was enforced by Justianian I. Why?

Jim Larmore

I believe according to Josephus that Daniel was a part of the prophets and not the writings where it is now. It was canonized by the time the dead sea scrolls were copied. Theres ample evidence that it was written or copied in the late 5th or early century B.C.

Diogenes the Cynic

Dude, what Greek have you studied?

There is no letter in Koine that transliterates to C. Apocalypse in Greek is apokaluyiV. Those letters transliterate in English to "apokalupsis." I don't know where you saw that "ck" construction for the kappa but I suspect you mistook a phonetic rendering for a transliteration.

Diogenes the Cynic

Well, you're dead in the water right there. Daniel was written during the Maaccabean revolt of 2nd century BCE.

It also says nothing about Jesus.

Celsus

"Canonisation" is an anachronism. But I suppose you have some evidence of where and how the books were "canonised"? Does this mean Esther is non-canonical, since it isn't found among the Dead Sea Scrolls?
I'm all ears.

Joel

spin

Sadly you don't seem to know much about Daniel at all.


No, you can't.

It's raving rubbish in tarted clothes.

I don't have to m ake a claim this limp rubbish doesn't start to understand Daniel. Why don't you do the plainly normal thing and buy a decent academic commentary on Daniel rather than suck up to this piffle. Go to Eisenbraun's for example or do a search for J.J. Collins's commentary and buy it..

I can show you you are talking rubbish.

None of the following am I asking you to believe, but to investigate.

Clue 1: from Dan 7 to Dan 12 there are four different visions of the same set of events, merely visions from different perspectives.

Vision 1 - (Dan 7)
Clue 2: Dan 7:2-8 takes a long view of history with four beasts, beings which represented 1) Babylon, the lion; 2) Media, the bear; 3) Persia, the panther (it is an error to try to combine Media and Persia); and 4) Greece, the elephant (after the preferred Seleucid fighting weapon). Naturally, Israel is represented not by a beast but by one like a son of man. (Christianity has always blundered here, trying to make this a title rather than a description.)

Clue 3: Dan 7's ten horns are the kings from Alexander to Seleucus III plus Heliodorus and his puppet Seleucid king.

Clue 4: the little horn which supplanted these last three horns was Antiochus IV. Antiochus was not destined to become king (Dan 11:21 talking of him says "on whom royalty was not conferred"). This horn is arrogant, the most common adjective the Jews used regarding Antiochus IV.

Clue 5: this Antiochus imposed a Greek calendar on the Jews and forbad the worship of the Jewish god. He set out to "change the times and the laws". The Jews would be delivered into his hands for three and a half years (a time, times and half a time), the half a week of years in 9:27.

Vision 2 - (Dan 8)
Clue 6: the second vision starts with the Medes, the first horn of the ram, and the Persians as the larger second horn, but Alexander the he-goat arrives from the west, "but in the peak of his power his big horn was broken". He was followed by the four powers, the Ptolemies, the Seleucids, the Antigonids and the Eumenids. Again a little horn appeared (8:9), the same from ch.7, Antiochus IV.

Clue 7: Antiochus overthrew the old temple regime, doing away with regular sacrifice to God and desecrated the Temple, causing the faithful priesthood to abandon the Temple (8:10-11).

Clue 8: 2300 evenings and mornings, ie 1150 days, were given till the sanctuary will be cleaned, that is about 3.25 years. It was 3.5 years from the start of Antiochus's persecution until the Temple was rededicated.

Vision 3 - (Dan 9:24-27)
Clue 9: seven weeks of years from the end of the exile will lead to the high priest Yeshua, mentioned in various places including Zech 6:11 -- high priests were the anointed ones here. He will be followed by 62 weeks leading to another anointed one, the high priest Onias III, who Antiochus had removed from office, hence he "will disappear and vanish" (9:26a).

Clue 10: we are in the last week of years, and after the first half week, Antiochus pollutes the Temple placing a statue of Zeus in his image therein, "the abomination of desolation" and inaugurating a persecution of the Jews, which lasted, half a week of years, a time, times and half a time, until the Temple was rededicated.

Vision 4 - (11:1-12:12)
Clue 11: we follow the wars between the king of the north, each successive Seleucid king, and the king of the south, the successive kings of Egypt. The description is quite accurate, showing the various ascendencies one over the other over time, when seen with the data found in Polybius's Histories.

Clue 12: (to start somewhere without going through it all) 11:19 reports the end of Antiochus III, followed by one who would "dispatch an officer to exact tribute for royal glory, but he will be broken in a few days, not by wrath or by war." You can read about the officer dispatched by Seleucus III, Heliodorus, in 2 Macc 3, especially verses 13ff.

Clue 13: Antiochus IV, "the contemptible one", "shall come in without warning and obtain the kingdom through intrigue." (11:21b) The rest of the book deals with th repercussions. Antiochus was quite successful, removing Onias III (11:22). He will plunder Judea.

Clue 14: he will attack the king of the south, Egypt, twice. The first time he makes a pact with an Egyptian king (11:27), the second time he will be stopped by Roman intervention (11:30).

Clue 15: this makes him leave Egypt in anger and his forces will "occupy and profane" Jerusalem's temple and fortress. "They shall abolish the regular burnt offering and set up the abomination which makes desolate." (11:31) He will have support within Jerusalem ("those who violate the covenant", ie Menelaus and his supporters).

By now, I think I've shown that there is a good reason to consider a specific historical context as the one behind all four visions in Dan 7-12. There is a lot more to be said, but I think I've done enough. I just need to look at the number of days left, ie 1290, just over 3.5 years, but that still wasn't quite accurate so we get a further adjustment to 1335 days, ie a month an a half more, though still less than four years. So, many times we get the same basic time to the end, nearly 3.5 years, then 3.5 years, then 3.5 years and finally 3.7 years. It takes time to write such texts so one can forgive a small stretching of the end.

It is only wantonness to overlook the vast historical background to the book of Daniel, which was recognized in antiquity by Josephus and Porphyry.

So if anyone wants to rub the slate clean and superimpose a Christian reading of the text, they should first show why the reading of Daniel in a Jewish context, ie the Hellenistic crisis is not correct. Then show how a Christian interpretation which manipulates the text is better.


spin