spin

I gave you the reference in Ezra. All the Persian kings mentioned in Ezra are in the table. Please read it.

And, Jim, Xerxes and Artaxerxes are two different names. This is why it helps to know even a tiny bit of history instead of blundering on as you have. Xerxes didn't stop the rebuilding Artaxerxes I did. All of your fantastication is built on error.


spin

Jim Larmore

And the original Hebrew had none of those things, i.e. punctuation. It seems rather odd to me that very learned translators of several different translations could come up with a totally different meaning of a verse than you. I know you have the Hebrew text in front of you. What I am trying to say is you may be misinterpreting what is being said by a change of the way it would be interpreted in our language as opposed to theirs .

For instance in Spanish its very common to place words in a backward order compared to the way we are accustomed to seeing them. Like when you ask someone how old they are in spanish it reads how many years have you? Or at times the phrasiology is a little confusing by placing the object of the verb in the last part of the sentence.

BTW, numerous english translations agree with me not you. KJV and NKJV say it like I do.

rexrex4

originally posted by Jim Larmore
Christians will often use the word History incorectly.You are interpreting the bible and calling your interpretation history as far as I can tell.


volume 3 of the interpreters bible Page 624 volume 3 of the interpreters bible says, This would mean the starting date of the prophecy would be 398 B.C.E. This also agrees with what spin has said .

From volume 3 of The Interpreter's Bible published by Abingdon Press on page 624. Only know of copy in local library.

Wallener

But that makes your case even more difficult. Since the punctuation was added long before the events of interest, it very directly contradicts your claim that "those then" may have read it differently since "those then" are precisely the ones who added clarifying punctuation.

Re: KJV, the questions remain: with what justification do they follow the punctuation virtually everywhere else, but not here? And with what justification do they change "annointed" to "Messiah" here, when they did not do the same anywhere else the phrase appeared?

unknown4

Jim, if the KJV is right, then what exactly was the purpose for saying 7 weeks and 62 weeks? Why not just simply say 69 weeks? I mean, the text doesn't say, ..."from the issuing of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince there shall be 7 weeks, during which it shall be rebuilt, the street will be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times, and 62 weeks, and after the 62 weeks the Messiah will be cut off"..., etc.

What exact reason would there have been to separate 7 weeks from 62 weeks if the Masoretic text is incorrect and the KJV is correct concerning Daniel 9:24-27?

Jim Larmore

I agree, Xerexes is the name found on a cuneiform tablet that indicates it was Ahasuerus, this was a "false" Smerdis who ruled for about a year in 522 B.C. and was killed by Darius 1. The contentions of expositors on who does what in what year is there. The Jews did cease work under the false Smedis but under Artaxerxes 1 they continued the work.

spin

Actually Xerxes is the Greek form of the Persian name Kshayarsha. Ahasuerus is the Hebrew form.

Pathos, Jim, that's what you get for that poor little effort.

Please look at the data in the table I provided from Ezra. It is plain and simple. Absorb it before responding, as this sort of fudging will get you nowhere.


spin

unknown4

Correction: I guess a year of Darius II isn't used as a start date, but rather one of Darius I.

Here's a link to some Christian theories on the start date:
http://users.cwnet.com/dalede/SeventySevens.htm

Something from the book of Jeremiah, Artaxerxes Longimanus' 7th year, 20th year, a year of Cyrus, and a year of Darius I are mentioned as start dates. The view that it was something from the book of Jeremiah isn't really discussed though, just briefly mentioned.

I wish I could find one of the websites which picked a year of Cyrus as a start date.

Jim Larmore

Most expositors take this as an cumulative account of adding up the years. 7 weeks is added to three score weeks then add two weeks to make 69 weeks. For instance lets say you are 40 years old, well according to the way they say it here we could say you are 10 years and 30 years old or 10 and 10 and 10 and 10 years old, or any fairly large number combintion to add up to 40. The way these languages were written back then has a unfamiliar flow to us in our time now, but there doesn't appear to be any other reason to do anything with this string of numbers except to add them up for an end number of 69. It would have been easier for us to just say 69 but they did things differently back then.

unknown4

Actually, here it is, this link http://www.ccg.org/english/s/p013.html says the start date was from Darius II.