Results 1 to 15 of 18
-
April 16th 2006, 08:01 PM #1
Adjunct Professor
- Join Date
- September 25th, 2003
- Location
- Colorado
- Posts
- 14,507
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
Male - ChristianOUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
Interpreting Daniel
A Premillennial Historicist Study of the Book of Daniel
Introduction
The book of Daniel has been divided since it was written into 12 chapters. But the author wrote the book in four distinct sections: chapter 1 - a narrative section introducing the author and the setting; chapter 2 - a prophetic section introducing the panorama of foretold history inaugurated in the events of Daniel's lifetime and consummated in a future Kingdom of God; chapters 3-6 - a narrative section detailing key events during Daniel's life in Babylon: the deliverance of three of his friends from Nebuchadnezzar's idolatrous pride; the arrogance of the king and the judgment of God upon him; the ruin of Belshazzar and the capture of Babylon by the Persians; and the deliverance of Daniel from the plot of his enemies. Chapters 7-12 contain the fourth section of the book which is prophetic and the most difficult portion of the book to interpret. This section includes a vision that parallels the vision of the statue in chapter 2 with much added detail; a vision that traces foretold history from the rise to dominance of the Greek Empire to the end of "the indignation" during which the "holiness and host" are trampled; Daniel's prayer and the answering "seventy weeks prophecy"; the last of the portions of the long prophetic section in Dan 7-12 stretches from chapter 10 to chapter 12 in an unusually literal and detailed foretelling of history terminating in the event of the resurrection (12:2,3).
It is this entire prophetic section of chapters 7-12 which pose the greatest difficulty for interpreters and therefore my post will concentrate on this section while situating it for the sake of understanding in the context of what was revealed by God in the other prophetic section of Daniel (chapter 2) and illuminated by the narrative portions of the book. Any other approach to Daniel that rips certain (and extremely controversial and difficult) prophecies out of context without consideration to the message of the book as a whole must be judged as completely unsatisfactory. This, after all, is a debate about eschatology-concerning "last things". This portion of the debate is to present each eschatological system's interpretation of the prophecies in Daniel. To ignore certain prophecies as irrelevant is to dismiss them on the basis of a prejudiced assumption about their meaning. In other words, a conclusion is offered to the readers of this debate that these ignored sections have nothing to do with "last things" without offering any evidence or argument for that assumption.
The following discussion of the major prophecies in chapters 7-12 relies on the reader's familiarity with the introductory prophecy of chapter 2. It should be noted that the subsequent prophecies, following on the principle of progressive revelation, expand and add detail to the prophecy of chapter 2. In other words, the chronology prophesied in chapter 2 is the primary chronology--the schedule into which all the other prophecies in Daniel are placed.
Chapter 1
Daniel begins with a historical reference:
Most evangelical scholars agree that this was around the year 606 B.C., or some 115 (of our) years after the fall of the Northern Kingdom of Israel to the Assyrians. This historical context is extremely important for understanding Daniel's message since it situates the events of this book in the wider history of God's dealings with the nation of Israel. The disastrous history of the Nation and the consequences of their rebellion were foretold by Moses in Leviticus 26:14-39. A particular portion of Moses' prophecy here applies to the events of Daniel's lifetime:
The prophet Ezekiel, during his captivity in Babylon warned that the Temple in Jerusalem would shortly be destroyed because of the sins of the nation. His words offer a second and more explicit prediction of that in Lev 26:19:
But as was made clear by Moses and the prophets, the nation would persist in their rebellion until a final destruction and dispersion. The same passage in Leviticus 26 goes on:
This is the prophetic/historical place of Daniel in the life of the nation of Israel. It is at a point of crisis and judgment, but not the final point of ruin and desolation that had been foretold. That this was clear to the prophet Daniel is shown by his study of the prophecies of Jeremiah in chapter 9:
So Daniel prayed to the Lord repenting for himself and the exiled nation and pleading for restoration and forgiveness. In answer to his prayer, the angel came to Daniel to reveal to him that the nation would be restored (9:25) but that a time-limit is apportioned for
to bring their rebellion to an end-otherwise greater desolation would follow as foretold by Moses. More will be said about the prophecy of chapter 9 later.
This leads me to comment on the division of the book of Daniel into two languages: 1:1-2:3 are written in Hebrew; 2:4 to the end of chapter 7 are in Aramaic; and 8:1 to the end of the book are in Hebrew again. Thus it is reasonable given the content of these three sections to conclude that the Hebrew portions primarily concern Daniel's people Israel, while the Aramaic portions concern the Gentile nations that would for a time have dominion over the Jews.
Daniel 1:1-2:3 introduces the writings of this prophet and places them properly in the story of the nation of Israel. Israel has lost her king. She is now controlled by a foreign nation and will be until the last times. Individually, Daniel and his friends are now living in the house of a pagan king, in his service. This section tells the story of the Israelites. For this reason this section is written in Hebrew.
Chapter 2
ARAMAIC SECTION
However, Daniel 2:4 begins a section written in Aramaic-a Gentile language-that describes the actions of God through history as Gentile kingdoms are allowed to trample under-foot the nation of Israel. The main characters are now pagan Gentiles.
It is appropriate that the Gentile section begins with a panoramic overview of Gentile history from that point forward to the last times. Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the statue foretells a succession of Gentile empires. The period starts with a relatively noble king and empire-the gold head personified by King Nebuchadnezzar. Then the empires deteriorate all the way to being poorly mixed with clay. Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome. The Roman dominion lasts until the Kingdom of God replaces and destroys all the kingdoms of men and extends its rule over all Creation. However, the Roman dominion goes through a dramatic transition: the first phase is as a solid, iron, unified empire; the second is as a divided, weakened entity mixed with other peoples. However, all of these centuries foreseen here are dominated by Gentile, not Jewish, rule-right up until the Kingdom of God. This whole period, then, is what Jesus referred to in Luke 21:24 as, "the times of the gentiles". It is during this long era of history characterized by Gentile dominance that Jerusalem, according to Jesus' prediction, would be trampled under foot by the Gentiles. At the end of this era Jerusalem would logically be freed from Gentile rule and alternatively be under Jewish rule. So there is a "sign of the times" to be learned here: the end of the Times of the Gentiles will coincide with the rise of the Jewish nation; the rise of the Jewish nation would accompany the decline of the last of the Gentile empires (the 10 kingdoms of Western Europe) and shortly precede the coming of the everlasting Kingdom of God.
Babylon did give way to the empire of the Medes and the Persians, and they were conquered by Greece. Greece in turn was conquered by Rome, which ruled and trampled down the Jewish people and the city of Jerusalem until the fifth century AD. At that time Rome succumbed to the Barbarian tribes pressing in on her borders. The last of the Caesars fell in 476. The territory of Rome was claimed by various barbarian tribes. Within a short time the Western Roman Empire-the part that was never part of the Babylonian, Persian or Grecian empires-was controlled by the kingdoms of the Lombards, Franks, Burgundians, Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Vandals, Heruli, Sueves, Huns and Saxons. This state of affairs will continue, as predicted, until the Kingdom of God. There are still 10 "kingdoms" ruling the former Roman territory-the names and make-up of those nations have changed, but there are still 10: Italy, Austria, Switzerland, France, the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Luxemburg, Belgium, Spain, and Portugal. It will be during the time of these "kings" that God will set up His Kingdom which will never end.
Chapter 3
Chapter 3 details the familiar story of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego and their refusal to worship any god except the LORD God. The first thing to notice is the similarity between the image of gold built by Nebuchadnezzar and the identification by Daniel, in chapter 2, of the head of gold. Daniel told the king that the head of gold in his vision represented the kingdom of Babylon under the rule of Nebuchadnezzar himself. So whether this knowledge went to the king's head or not, the similarity may be intended by Daniel as a type. If so, the type probably teaches that during the whole Times of the Gentiles, the era predicted by the statue in chapter 2, those Jews who are faithful to Yahweh alone will be preserved and not only preserved, but would enjoy the supernatural presence of Yahweh Himself with them in the midst of their tribulations.
Chapter 4
Chapter 4 continues Nebuchadnezzar's story-in his words there came another time when he forgot that he ruled as YHWH allowed. Because of his pride and arrogance God gave him a "beast's mind" while "seven times" passed over him (4:16). The punishment would come to an end when the king recognized that the Most High is the King of kings and gives dominion over humankind to whomever He wishes (4:25). This happened to him as predicted, and he became like a beast while seven periods of time passed by (4:32), and then God gave him back his mind and he gave God the glory (4:34-37).
Chapter 5
Chapter 5 narrates the decline and fall of the Babylonian kingdom (as predicted in the vision of chapter 2) and the rise of the Medes and the Persians (5:30-31).
Chapter 6
Chapter 6 witnesses to the continued service of Daniel under Persian rule and the opportunity the people of God have to testify to the glory of the God of Israel in spite of their national humiliation (6:25-28).
Chapter 7
Chapter 7 parallels chapter 2 in many ways: a panoramic vision of the history of Gentile dominion over the Jews until the Kingdom of God. But some important details are added. We have seen through chapters 2-6 that God preserves a remnant of His faithful saints to bear witness to Him even while the nation of Israel is punished and humiliated. Daniel served in this way in his captivity. Chapter 7 adds the information that even at the end of the kingdoms of the Gentiles there will still be a faithful remnant, the "saints" (7:18, 21, 22, 25 and 27).
As Nebuchadnezzar became like a beast while he refused to acknowledge the Most High God, the Gentile empires are pictured as beasts. They would become more and more beast like until the last, the Roman, would not even resemble a created beast, but a man-made monster (7:19).
The beasts who are conquered, while losing their dominion, do remain in place submissive to those that follow. They are allowed to survive until the Kingdom of God replaces all human rule (7:12). Thus, the territory ruled by the 10 horns (ten kings) that grow out of the Roman monster is that area only ruled by Rome and never by Babylon, Persian, or Greece. They grow out of the Roman beast and none of the other beasts (7:20, 24). Therefore these 10 kingdoms are the same European kingdoms that rose up from the ruins of the Roman empire in the 5th and 6th centuries AD. AS you can see from verse 24, the number of kingdoms in the Roman territory would sometimes fluctuate, but by the coming of the Kingdom of God there would again be the full number of 10 (2:41-44 make clear that the Kingdom of God comes in the "days of those kings"; 2:34-35 picture the stone of God's Kingdom crashing down on the feet of ten toes).
The last Gentile power to have dominion over God's people is the little horn that grows up just after the 10 kingdoms appear.
He is different from the other 10 kings (7:24). Much worse than simply refusing to acknowledge the Most High God, this king is more beast-like than all his predecessors: he will
and even
However he impersonates a faithful servant of the Most High, claiming to serve while he blasphemes. In this way he has some of the look of a man (7:8). And the saints will be given into this blasphemous king's hand for 3 ˝ times. In chapter 4, Nebuchadnezzar became like a beast for 7 times. I believe he typified the entire history of Gentile dominion: it would all be beast-like in this way and its duration would be for a full "seven periods of time". The duration of this last blasphemous king having dominion over the saints would be for the last half of that whole 7 times of the Gentiles.
The sequence of the events of these prophecies suggest that the little blasphemous horn and the other 10 kings appear just after the collapse of the unified Roman Empire. That took place fully and finally in 476 AD. Historians agree that there have been an average of 10 kingdoms/countries in that formerly Roman territory ever since. The history of that period of the fall of Rome also testifies that in the vacuum of power left by the fallen caesars, the people of the city of Rome turned to the only other stable authority they knew: the Bishop of Rome. By the year 606 with the decree of the Emperor of Constantinople, Phocas, the Bishop of Rome was granted supreme religious authority over all of Europe and Byzantium. In this way the ruler of Rome became different from the other European kings: he was a political head in Rome, and he was a religious head in all of Europe. Called, "papa" or "pope" by the citizens of Rome, the Pope continued to be the ruler of the city of Rome until Victor Emmanuel, the King of Italy seized the city of Rome as the capitol of Italy in 1876. Since then, the Pope is only a religious figure-head. He no longer has military, political, temporal dominion. The time of his temporal reign, during which time he had dominion over God's people, can be measured, for example, from 606 AD until 1876 AD: 1260 years (Dan 7:25, 12:7, Rev 11:2-3, 12:6, 14, 13:5).
This period of the reign of what we call "the antichrist". Although this word does not appear in any apocalyptic prophecy at all, it is a fitting Christian description for the blasphemy of the little horn and the mouth-piece of the Beast (Rev 13:5). The word, "antichrist" does not simply mean "enemy of Christ" but by usurping or taking Christ's place he is manifestly Christ's enemy:
The Pope of the Roman Church does precisely this, and has long been recognized as a usurper within the Christian church:"Anti can mean substitution or opposition, but both ideas are identical in the word antichristos (in N.T. only here, 2:22; 4:3; 2Jo 1:7). Westcott rightly observes that John's use of the word is determined by the Christian conception, not by the Jewish apocalypses."- A. T. Robertson, Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament
However, it is now apparent that the time allowed by God for the Roman bishop/king to
is long over. The prophecy said nothing about the timing of his destruction, only of his dominion over the saints. So the persecution's over but he's still here. But the time is coming when the Son of Man will receive the Kingdom (7:13-14) and the saints, the people of the Most High, will reign with Him (7:18, 22, 27).
Chapter 8
HEBREW SECTION
Chapter 8 concerns the
The phrase can be more understood in English translated as,
The word, "place" is not in that verse any more than it is in Dan 9:24. The Aramaic in Dan 7:18 speaks of the saints as "holies of God" or "holy ones of God". Revelation 13:7 is equivalent where "holies" is translated, "saints". Here in Daniel 8 I believe the noun is collective to refer to the nation of Israel as a whole, but in connection with their land. The nation is trampled in the sense that their land is trampled underfoot by the enemy portrayed in chapter 8. In particular it is the "foundation of the holy place" or "the established place of the sanctuary" that falls into the hands of this enemy. The main thrust of chapter 8 is not about the enemy but about the trampling of Jerusalem. Verse 14 gives the duration of its trampling. The time would be 2300 mornings and evenings. The end of that time would see the restoration of Jerusalem-NOT the "temple". The word for "Temple", "hękal" is not used in this passage. Instead simply "the foundation of the holy place" referring more generically to Jerusalem the headquarters, as it were, of the worship of the Most High by His people Israel. From the transition pictured in vv 4-5, the 2300 (lunar or solar) years might be measured from the beginning of the Persian offensive of Xerxes against the Greeks (480 BC) or from as late as Alexander's conquest of Persia (331 BC). 2300 lunar years from any of the major events within that range bring us to the era of gradual Jewish liberation and the Zionist movement in Europe and the Middle East. Jesus said Jerusalem would be
The horn that grows out of a horn that replaces Alexander's prominent horn on the Greek goat, I believe is Islam. It did arise out of the Arabian peninsula, a commercial territory of the Ptolemies-one of the four horns that replaced Alexander. And the important dates of Jewish restoration up until the Balfour Declaration do coincide with the demise and collapse of the last Islamic Empire, the Turkish Empire. Still there is much to study and learn here.
In the time since I first wrote the preceding paragraph, I believe the Holy Spirit may have given me a small insight into the beginning and ending points of the 2300 prophetic days (fulfilled as historic years). Verse 8 describes the breaking of the prominent horn representing the dynasty of Philip, Alexander's father, which included Alexander and his son. That dynasty was broken at the death of Alexander's son, at which time Alexander's four generals parcelled up the empire. The year of the formal division of the Greek Empire into four dynastic kingdoms was 301 BC. Dating from that year, 2300 calendar years (luni-solar harmonizations consisting of 360 days each, or 12 30-day months) comes to 1967 AD, the year of the famous "Six Day War" in which Israel gained control of the whole city of Jerusalem for the first time since the time of Daniel. Some people would object to this observation, but let me point out that at the time of Christ, for example, while Jews lived in and worshipped in Jerusalem and in the temple there, the city itself was under Roman rule. It was still being trampled by the Gentiles. After 1967, Jerusalem has been fully under Jewish rule, though it is still inhabited by many Muslims, and though the Muslims worship on the site of the old Jewish Temple. If the situation in 30 AD could be described as part of the "times of the Gentiles" by Jesus in Luke 21:24, the situation after 1967 could not.
v14 - "[the] holy will be made just" c.f. Deut 16:20; Deut 25:15 only the "just" will inherit the land.
What is the "regular sacrifice" mentioned in verse 12 and elsewhere? In Hebrew, the word "sacrifice" is not present. The phrase is really just the Hebrew word meaning "continual". "The continual" is not burnt offerings, but the whole regular worship of God - in this case the regular public worship of God. Verse 12 says that the host, or the nation of Israel described in military terms, will be "trampled" as the result of their transgression. Verse 13 expands on this point of view to say that the vision is principally about the regular worship of God. During the Old Testament era we would think of that as consisting of the regular sacrifice and ritual temple worship in Jerusalem. In the New Testament era we would rightly interpret the same phrase as the regular and proper worship of Christ Jesus as the fulfillment of the Old Testament Covenant and the one who "did away" with the regular sacrifices in the temple:
The period during which regular worship in both eras is interrupted with regard to the nation of Israel is referred to as being "while the transgression causes horror", or the tribulations of ethnic Israel during their scattering among the nations of earth.
At Christ's instruction, Gabriel interpreted this vision for Daniel, beginning in verse 17. Verse 19 makes clear that this vision describes the final stages of Israel's tribulation and scattering. "The latter period of the indignation," the focus of the interpretation, is on the final stages of the Greek Empire and its demise, c.f., v 23.
Verses 20-22 briefly set the stage for the main focus of the vision, the last stages of Israel's tribulation, which begins in verse 23. In verse 23, the "latter part of their kingdom" refers to the time of the Byzantine Empire. It is not their "kingdoms" but their "kingdom" (singular) picturing a time when the four dynasties that succeeded Alexander would be collectively represented by a single Greek Kingdom. (Cachemaille, 61) It is during the time of the Byzantines that this "king will arise" who will be insolent and powerful, supernaturally powerful, and even outrightly opposed to Christ Jesus, the Prince of princes. This "king" is Islam under the headship of Mohammed and his successors, the Caliphs. Thus in verse 17, the "time of the end" refers to the final stages of the tribulations of Israel during which era Jerusalem would be under Muslim rule, i.e., the Turks and Ottomans. Verse 24 succinctly refers to the destruction of the old and powerful Byzantine Empire, unconquerable for over a thousand years, by the Muslims. This destruction also included many "holy ones" or saints, Christians living in Constantinople at the time. It also brought to an end the regular and proper worship of Christ in Constantinople, fulfilling the prediction of the removal of "the continual" in verse 11. As an example of this fulfillment, just note the former glory of the Hagia Sophia, the great Christian place or worship and how it was transformed into a mosque of Islam. Furthermore, note that although several centuries of history are compressed into this wonderfully brief narrative, the Spirit which inspired Daniel is very accurate: it was during the time of the Byzantines ("the latter part of their kingdom") that Islam arose; it was Islam which brought an end to Christian worship in Byzantium; it was Islam, during the same period, the time of the Byzantines, that built the Dome of the Rock, that great idolatrous indignation that "cast down" the foundation place of the ancient sanctuary in Jerusalem.
Verse 25 says that "he will be broken without human agency," i.e., not conquered by an empire, c.f., "drying up of the euphrates" in Rev. 16:12 (see Cachemaille, 67-70). The history of the decline of the Ottoman Empire shows exactly that. It was by internal decay, Divinely caused, that the Ottoman Empire collapsed. And indeed, this decline and eventual collapse, the "drying up of the Euphrates" did prepare the way for the "kings from the east" the scattered and exiled Israelites and Jews who began to return to Zion in the 19th century and established the new State of Israel in 1948.
Chapter 9
That brings us to chapter 9.
How can we begin to make sense of this short but crucial prophecy when so many godly and highly educated scholars have made such a mess of their conflicting and contradicting interpretations of this passage? As always, real understanding can only come when we humbly rely on the Holy Spirit and do our very best to let the Scripture be our guide to interpretation. So let's start with a little biblical history…
NASB Then the people of the land took Joahaz the son of Josiah, and made him king in place of his father in Jerusalem. Joahaz was twenty-three years old when he became king, and he reigned three months in Jerusalem. Then the king of Egypt deposed him at Jerusalem, and imposed on the land a fine of one hundred talents of silver and one talent of gold. The king of Egypt made Eliakim his brother king over Judah and Jerusalem, and changed his name to Jehoiakim. But Neco took Joahaz his brother and brought him to Egypt. Jehoiakim was twenty-five years old when he became king, and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem; and he did evil in the sight of the LORD his God. Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up against him and bound him with bronze chains to take him to Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar also brought some of the articles of the house of the LORD to Babylon and put them in his temple at Babylon. Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim and the abominations which he did, and what was found against him, behold, they are written in the Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah. And Jehoiachin his son became king in his place. Jehoiachin was eight years old when he became king, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem, and he did evil in the sight of the LORD. At the turn of the year King Nebuchadnezzar sent and brought him to Babylon with the valuable articles of the house of the LORD, and he made his kinsman Zedekiah king over Judah and Jerusalem. Zedekiah was twenty-one years old when he became king, and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem. He did evil in the sight of the LORD his God; he did not humble himself before Jeremiah the prophet who spoke for the LORD. He also rebelled against King Nebuchadnezzar who had made him swear allegiance by God. But he stiffened his neck and hardened his heart against turning to the LORD God of Israel. Furthermore, all the officials of the priests and the people were very unfaithful following all the abominations of the nations; and they defiled the house of the LORD which He had sanctified in Jerusalem. The LORD, the God of their fathers, sent word to them again and again by His messengers, because He had compassion on His people and on His dwelling place; but they continually mocked the messengers of God, despised His words and scoffed at His prophets, until the wrath of the LORD arose against His people, until there was no remedy. Therefore He brought up against them the king of the Chaldeans who slew their young men with the sword in the house of their sanctuary, and had no compassion on young man or virgin, old man or infirm; He gave them all into his hand. All the articles of the house of God, great and small, and the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king and of his officers, he brought them all to Babylon. Then they burned the house of God and broke down the wall of Jerusalem, and burned all its fortified buildings with fire and destroyed all its valuable articles. Those who had escaped from the sword he carried away to Babylon; and they were servants to him and to his sons until the rule of the kingdom of Persia, to fulfill the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed its sabbaths. All the days of its desolation it kept sabbath until seventy years were complete.
2Ch 36:1-21
This passage in 2 Chronicles really provides the historical backdrop to Daniel's prayer in Daniel 9, and the prophecy that was God's answer to that prayer, in verses 24-27. Notice in verse 14, the word, "abominations." And in verse 21, notice the word, "desolation." It was the "abominations" that caused "the desolation". In Daniel 9:1-19, the prophet explains the same thing: the people of Israel had been unfaithful and so they brought these "desolations" (Dan 9:2) on themselves. The biblical context of this prophecy in Dan 9:24-27 refutes efforts of many interpreters to pin this phrase, "abomination causing desolation," to the sacrifice of a pig or the erection of an idol in the inner sanctum of the Jewish temple.
Gabriel's message to Daniel revealed that his people and his city would be restored (Dan 9:25) in answer to his prayer (Dan 9:16-19), but this is accompanied by a further revelation that a new deadline is allotted to the people and the city:
(Daniel 9:24 American Standard Version) Seventy weeks are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy.
(Daniel 9:24 The English Revised 1833 Webster Update 1995) Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. (While these translations bear differences from my own, they both translate "most holy" literally while refraining from interpreting it as a "place".)
"Seventy sevens" within which period, 1) they must finish or restrain their transgression; 2) their sins would be sealed for their own judgment; 3) atonement would be made for their iniquity, resulting in, 4) the provision of everlasting righteousness for the faithful of Daniel's people (Heb 10:1-18); 5) the sealing, authorizing and consummating, of prophetic revelation entrusted to Daniel's people, and, 6) the anointing of the most holy prince who would be cut off in the middle of the seventieth week, or 486.5 (approx.) years from the issuing of a decree. It seems that the "introduction" of the prophecy of Dan 9:24-27, the "seventy weeks" prophecy, contained in verse 24 is fulfilled in the life, death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus of Nazareth.
This is possibly the most difficult and controversial passage in the entire Christian Bible. But as we study these 4 verses honestly, looking carefully to see what we learn from the text itself, we come to some conclusions. The time period, "seventy weeks" (v 24) appears to be a deadline that applies to the Jews and the city of Jerusalem (v 24). Within this deadline six things must either be done by the Jews, or happen in Jerusalem:
1. the Jews must "complete their transgression,"
2. their sins must be sealed for future judgment,
3. their guilt would be atoned for,
4. everlasting righteousness would be provided (doing away with the Old Testament system of sacrifices),
5. the vision and prophecy of the Old Testament would be sealed (fulfilled and finished), and,
6. the Most Holy, Jesus, would be anointed.
The key to the interpretation of this prophecy begins, as always, with the context. In Daniel 9:2, we see that the desire of Daniel's heart, the desire that moved him to offer the prayer the answer to which includes our passage in verses 24-27, concerns the "desolations of Jerusalem". In Daniel 9:4-11, in his prayer to God, Daniel confesses that the "desolations" are the right and proper Divine response to the nation's transgression and rebellion.
(Daniel 9:11) "Indeed all Israel has transgressed Your law and turned aside, not obeying Your voice; so the curse has been poured out on us, along with the oath which is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, for we have sinned against Him.
The curse and oath from the Law of Moses that Daniel cites is found in Leviticus 26, the "desolations" are predicted specifically in Lev 26:31. Daniel was certainly familiar with this oath which Moses recorded in that passage. The surprising thing is that Daniel hoped for restoration after 70 years at all. Moses had predicted that the consequence to national rebellion was a complete destruction of the city and a scattering of the people of Israel throughout the earth for a very long time (Lev 26:33-45). Yet Daniel knew that because Jeremiah had prophesied restoration after 70 years of desolation, that God would keep His word (Dan 9:2; Jer 25:11; 29:10). The answer to the prayer that Daniel humbly pours out to God, therefore, answers very precisely these points of Daniel's concern.
Before going on, notice that several key words are semantically related to other key words in the passage. That means that just like the word "runner" (a noun) is closely related in meaning to the word, "running" (a participle") and the word, "to run" (an infinitive verb), closely related words in a difficult passage of Scripture are a good way to zero-in on the meaning of the passage.
· "people" (v 24) is repeated in verse 26;
· "city" and "holy" (v 24) are related and repeated, respectively, to "Jerusalem" (v 25), "city" and, "sanctuary" in verse 26;
· "to finish" (v 24) is related to "complete destruction" in verse 27;
· "to anoint" (v 24) is related to "anointed" or "Messiah" in verses 25 and 26;
· "Prince" (v 25) is repeated in verse 26.
And so, as a result, one of the implications of these relationships among the words in the passage is that, "Most Holy," (v 24) after being anointed, is called "Anointed Prince," (v 25) and, "the Prince who is coming," (v 26). You might find this difficult to see or accept right now, but hold the thought as a possibility while we explore the passage in more depth.
From a theological point of view it is a given that the ultimate transgression of the nation can be placed squarely on the acts of defiling whatever is Most Holy to God. The Mosaic covenant hinges on the right observance of the sacred. And so I find a great deal of insight into the prophetic passage in verses 24-27 in the proper interpretation of the "most holy" in verse 24. The phrase "Most Holy," or, "qodesh qodashim" is claimed by many to be the Temple and so they insert in most modern translations the word, "place" to read, "most holy place". But the phrase does not say, "place" in Hebrew. Some claim that this phrase, "most holy" always refers to the Temple, the Holy of Holies, or some other aspect of Temple worship and never to a person. But in 1 Chronicles 23:13, Aaron and his sons forever are set apart by God as "most holy". That Aaron's priesthood is a type of Christ is established beyond debate by the author of Hebrews. So if Aaron is "most holy" certainly that greater Reality which was signified in him is also "Most Holy". I am suggesting that the prediction at the end of verse 24 is regarding the anointing of the person of the Son of God, known here as, "Most Holy".
Verse 25 refers to Most Holy again, but this time from the perspective that He is now anointed, looking forward to the time when verse 24 is fulfilled and the Most Holy is anointed. Verse 25 predicts the time from a certain decree until "the anointed Prince." In fact this is the basis for the title, "Christ" or "Messiah" in reference to Jesus. Both the Greek and the Hebrew words mean "Anointed One". If in verse 24 someone's anointing is predicted, namely the "Most Holy," then it is appropriate in the next verse that this Most Holy be titled "The Anointed Prince"-remembering, of course, that "prince" in Hebrew does not mean "son of a king" but "ruler," and that "anointing" was most often a condition of "kingship."
This sheds light on the difficult issue of who is "he" in verse 26. Understanding comes when "nagid habbo'" (prince who is coming) is seen as the substantive referring to 'ad-mashiach nagid (until the anointed prince). "habbo'" (coming) refers in context to the person whose "coming" was just predicted. The "coming" verb in Dan 9:25 is not explicit, to be sure, but by the use of the temporal clause in 25a the anointed Prince's coming is clearly implied. Moreover, as Most Holy, "qodesh qodashim," is predicted to be "anointed", (velimshoach) in 24, verse 25 predicts the timing of His "arrival" having been "anointed" and now described as "Prince", nagid. The word "anointed" connects the Subject of both verses (24-25). In 25-26, the word "prince", nagid, likewise holds the single Subject in view. To put it plainly, "Most Holy" is predicted to be "anointed" in verse 24, He is called the "Anointed Prince" in verse 25, and the "coming Prince" in verse 26. Then the people will CAUSE (the verb is in the hifil stem, which is causative) the city, and that which makes it holy, i.e., the Temple (c.f., "your people and your holy city" v. 24) to be corrupted/destroyed. But whose people? Not just Daniel's people (v 24), but the coming anointed Prince's people (v 26). As much as Daniel cares for and intercedes on behalf of his people, The coming Prince cares for them more; intercedes for them more; and so when THEY reject HIM they become the cause of their own destruction. The Romans are present in this verse only insofar as they are glimpsed as one of the parties who will "war", and as the agents, not the cause, of "desolations". Hence the order of v 27:
1. He, the Anointed Prince, the Most Holy, will "confirm a covenant with the many" (KJV);
a. the "many" is a specific term associated with Christ's New Covenant denoting the Jews and Gentiles under one heading-Matthew 20:28; 26:28; Mark 14:24; Romans 5:15, 19; 1 Corinthians 10:33
b. This covenant referred to here is not any antichristian covenant, any peace treaty with Israel or any other idea that is read into the text. Rather, when we carefully draw the meaning out of the text, we find the covenant is intimately connected with the Most Holy, the Anointed Prince, the Coming Prince, Jesus the Anointed (Christ)-it is the new covenant in His blood, the ransom for many.
c. The text does not say that He will confirm the covenant for one week, but that He will confirm a covenant with the many one week, or translated more freely, "during a certain week He will confirm a covenant with the many". Compare 1 Sam 1:1; 2 Sam 18:10; Est 3:8 for the same use of the number "one" in Hebrew. When it says, "during a certain week" of course the certain week intended by the text is the one that fits the context of the preceding verses. Verse 25 gives 7 weeks + 62 weeks until the Anointed Prince comes. Verse 26 says that after that second period of 62 weeks (i.e., after the 69 weeks), the Anointed One, the coming Prince, will be "cut off". After the 69 weeks logically indicates a time during the 70th week. In verse 27, then, when it says "during a certain week" it means that this confirmation of the covenant to the many will take place during the 70th week.
2. The anointed Prince causes sacrifice and offering to stop.
a. See Heb 10:8-9, esp. 9b. Therefore the subsequent temple rituals of the Jews are idolatrous abominations (shiqqutsim) since they took place after the permanent sacrifice of the Son of God had taken place. It is comparable to Abraham going ahead and killing Isaac even after the ram had been provided.
b. When exactly does Christ (the Anointed One) cause the sacrifice and offering to stop, or when does He "put an end" to this old order? The text precisely says that this would take place "in the middle of the week." Not "in the middle of a week" but, "in the middle of the week", i.e., the seventieth week, the certain week during which Messiah was confirming a covenant with the many. Is it a coincidence that Jesus' public ministry lasted exactly three and a half years-"half a week"? Is it coincidence that it was exactly at the end of His three-and-a-half year ministry that He was crucified, sealing the covenant in His blood and putting an end to sacrifice and offering forever (c.f., Heb 10:9b)? No, this is no coincidence: this is a Messianic prophecy of the highest order.
3. "On the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate" (NASB).
4. "…until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate" (NASB).
The word "sevens" or "weeks" literally means "sabbaths", the way of counting days by sevens. Looking to history, we discover that the actual time period from both the decrees (that are most commonly suggested as the decree mentioned in verse 25), 69 weeks, or 483 days, was fulfilled in real years. The first was from the decree to Ezra in 458 BC (Ezra 7:11ff) and was fulfilled in 486.5 of our solar years until Jesus' crucifixion in 29-30 AD. Verse 26 adds that after the 69th consecutive "week", i.e., sometime after 483 years, the one who is anointed (verse 24, "Messiah") would be killed. The second decree was from the decree to Nehemiah in 444 BC (Neh 2:4-9) and was also fulfilled at the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus in lunar years: the middle of the seventieth week would be 486.5 years, which, dating from from 444 BC, comes to 29 AD, the year of Jesus' crucifixion. Then we are told that His people would be responsible for destroying the city and the temple (literally the city and the "holy"). The whole period after Messiah's death would be filled with an increasing "flood" of destruction (desolations) until the city's ultimate destruction in A.D. 70.
Verse 25 expands on the introduction in verse 24, and verse 27 functions as an explanation of the desolations in verse 26. It tells us why the city would be destroyed; in what way the people of Jerusalem were responsible for its destruction. It also gives a more precise time frame. First, in this specific week (literally in Hebrew it reads, [Dan 9:27 direct translation] "...and he will strengthen a covenant with the many one week…") Messiah will "strengthen" or "make strong" a covenant with "the many", i.e., the nations and not just the Jews. Then, in the middle of the week Messiah would cause the system of sacrifices and offerings to end-He did this by the permanent, once-and-for-all sacrifice of His death (Hebrews 10:8-12). Hebrews 10:9 even says that He takes away the first system to establish the permanent sacrifice. This means that the apostles understood this fulfillment. The last important idea in verse 27 is that on the "skirts" or "wings" of the "detestable things" or "abominations" of the Jews there would result "desolations" or "appalling horrors" right up until the final destruction of those responsible. The abominations in question are the idolatrous sacrifices and offerings of the Jewish people who rejected God's permanent provision of the sacrifice of the Messiah.
The "abominations" of the Jews, i.e., their idolatrous sacrifices offered in the name of God after He has already provided the final and ultimate Sacrifice in His Son, once again brought "desolation" on their city, Jerusalem, and the temple in AD 70, when the Romans besieged and levelled the city in a massive slaughter. War led up to the final, complete destruction of Jerusalem, in 70. Desolation resulted and continued century after century for most of the subsequent 2000 years. This was the terrible punishment that God had warned Israel about in the second half of Leviticus 26. And so we can see how important this prophecy, in Daniel 9:24-27, really is, when properly interpreted. It explains why the Jewish nation has suffered so much, and for so long, with no country to call their own until 1948 and the re-birth of the State of Israel. It was not the first time God had allowed "desolations" to come upon the people of Israel. But these "desolations" since Israel rejected their Anointed One, their Messiah, their Anointed Prince, their Most Holy One, have turned out to be "a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will [again]" (Mat 24:21). Isn't it amazing how even the most tragic history makes sense, and how the pieces of the puzzle fall into place, when Scripture is carefully studied and allowed to interpret itself?
Finally, this profound prophecy has a Christological focus throughout it. Christ is always the Subject. Christ's atonement is the theological centre of this prophecy and the culmination of the prophets' hopes for the nation of Israel-all "vision and prophecy" are indeed "sealed up" in Him (Dan 9:24). Christ, or Messiah, is also revealed here as the "Most Holy" the ultimate Reality to which the entire Temple system pointed; the "Coming Prince," or Ruler, anointed by God to rule the nations (Dan 7:13-14) and the Agent of God's saving covenant providing "everlasting righteousness" for all who believe. No wonder we call Him, "Jesus"-Yahweh Saves!
Chapter 10
Chapter 10 details the intervention of God in the affairs of His people, even as they suffer being trampled down by the Gentiles. The focus here is on the transition from Persia to Greece, and that God has not forgotten Israel. Michael (10:21) in Hebrew is "one compared to God" or literally "from like God". He is none other than the preincarnate Christ as can be seen from His title, "ruler of your people", and a close comparison of Jude 9 with Zechariah 3:2, where YHWH speaking is later said to be "Michael". As to the description of Michael as an "angel", in both Hebrew and Greek the word means "messenger". This is equivalent to the Greek concept "logos" in John 1-Jesus is the Messenger of God; HE is also the Message. The Christ intercedes for Daniel's people during this dark period of history (Dan 10:20-21).
Chapter 11
In verse 21, the KJV refers to the rise of a "vile person". Who is this person? Is he the Beast or the Antichrist, or someone else on the stage of history?
This "vile person" is not the beast. There are lots of vile people in the Bible, lots of vile people in the history of the nation of Israel: Nebuchadnezzar was at first vile; Antiochus Epiphanes was vile; the Caesars were vile; the Muslim Caliphs were vile.
I am inclined to agree with much of what John Gill has to say about this chapter in his exposition of the Old and New Testaments. To summarize, mixing his points with some of my own:
Verse 21 probably refers to Antiochus Epiphanes.
Verse 25 describes his invasion of Egypt against Ptolemy Philometor (see 1 Macabees 1), who was defeated because of the treachery of his own people.
Verse 28 see 1 Macabees 1:20-21.
Verse 30 the Roman Senate sent ships to force Antiochus to leave Alexandria alone. He was so furious about that defeat that he sent Appolonius to take his vengeance out on the Jews (1 Macabees 1:30; 2 Macabees 5:24).
Verse 31 "forces from him will arise" refers not to Antiochus' armies but the word "from him" (mimenu) usually means "than him" as in Genesis 48:19 where it is used to say that the younger brother shall be greater "than him"--not from him. So in verse 31 it means "forces other than his shall arise" or "after him forces shall arise" or "apart from him other forces shall arise", meaning the rise of the Roman Empire. this verse includes a brief reference to AD 70 and the destruction of Jerusalem.
The rest is, as they say, history. Verse 33 speaks of the early church spreading the Gospel to the Gentiles ("the many") in the face of persecution and martyrdom. Verse 34 predicts, with great economy of words, the conversion of the Empire to "Christianity" under Constantine, in the fourth century, but points out that it will be a corrupt form of Christianity, or "hypocritical". Verse 35 acknowledges that the centuries following the rise of Catholic Christianity would bring suffering for the saints: not what Christians would have expected in the optimistic decades of the fourth century! Verse 36 explains why: the new Roman leader, that is the ecclesial head of Rome, the Bishop of Rome, or the "Pope", will be fundamentally anti-Christian. He will exalt himself as "God on Earth". And he would "prosper" for a long, long time. Verse 37 shows the true spiritual reality behind the Roman antichristian Popes: they do not serve God at all, but themselves. They teach celibacy, in contradiction to the teaching of Scripture. Instead, in verse 38, we see that their ambition is for strength, power and wealth.
Verses 40-45 may cover the history of the Middle East from the Balfour Declaration to the Six Day War in 1967, but it is still probably too early to tell. At least I am uncomfortable attaching any level of dogmatism to the interpretation of these verses since I suspect they have not been completely fulfilled yet. What I will do is identify the characters in verse 40: there are three. The Antichrist is present, or at least his "empire" is represented probably in the form of the European Union. I would expect that when this happens, France will take a lead role since France is most likely what is today to be attached to the name, "Gomer" in Ezekiel 38. Secondly the "King of the South" is present. This probably refers to the United States or Atlantic Powers in general. Thirdly, the King of the North could refer to Syria, the true King of the North before the rise of the Roman Empire, to the former Ottoman Empire, which had its seat in modern-day Turkey, or to Russia, which is probably what Ezekiel 38 identifies as "Gog".
Chapter 12
What does it mean in Daniel 12:7 when it says that, "…as soon as they finish shattering the power of the holy people, all these events will be completed"?
The first thing to notice is that the word, "events" is not in the Hebrew. It is a translator's interpretation. Daniel 12:7 and as soon as they finish shattering the power of the holy people, all these events will be completed.
The word, "kala" is the root word for both the verbs translated in the NASB as "they finish" (regarding the 'shattering of the power of the Holy People') and "will be completed" (regarding, probably, 'these wonders' in verse 6). The first verb is an infinitive, so no tense or time can be attached to WHEN the shattering will be finished--I think the majority translations are right to take this as a temporal clause, e.g., "as soon as they finish..."
So the key to understanding the passage then must come from the last verb, "will be completed". The verb itself has a wide range of possible meanings or translations (see the only other two times this precise form of the verb is used in Job 11:20, "...will fail..." and Lamentations 4:17, "...failed..." NASB). But the basic meaning of the root is, according to Harris et. al. in The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, "to bring a process to completion." They go on to say, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, 982g wrote:
The processes which are brought to an end may be either positive or negative. That is, something may be continually added to until it is full or complete, or something may be taken away from until there is nothing left. The English word "finish" coincides very nicely with kąlâ in that it too can have either positive or negative connotations.
Processes which are brought to completion include the building of the temple (2Chr 8:16; etc.), speaking (Gen 17:22; etc.), eating (1Kings 1:41; etc.), drinking (Gen 24:19; etc.), offering (1Sam 13:10; etc.), harvesting (Ruth 2:21; etc.) and numerous others. There seems to be an emphasis upon totality in these references. It is not that a person simply came to a certain point in the process and stopped, but that he or she carried it out in full. An example is found in Ruth 3:18 where Naomi tells Ruth that Boaz will not rest "until he has finished the thing." The noun kąlâ demonstrates the same point in that it must often be translated "full end" to differentiate it from some other end which may be merely a stopping place. On the other hand, to say that kąlâ means "to bring to perfection" is somewhat misleading in modern English idiom. "Perfect" implies "without flaw" whereas "complete" does not address the question of flaws.
Since, therefore, the basic meaning of this verb at the end of Daniel 12:7 is "to bring a process to completion" the key to its interpretation will now be the tense of the verb. Unlike English and Greek, Hebrew does not have past, present and future tenses. It has perfect, imperfect and imperative conjugations. The perfect and imperfect conjugations usually limit the time or kind of situation described by the verb. Here, in Dan 12:7, the verb kala at the end of the verse is in the imperfect. Because it is in a temporal construction--relating elements of time--it should probably be translated as a future tense. We should note also that the verb is third person plural and feminine. The other main thing to notice is that the verb is not passive but active (in the qal stem): the action of the verb will not likely be done to the subject but by the subject.
To make this plainer, let's substitute another verb in the same tense and see what the passage would say:
"when the shattering of the power of the holy people is finished, they will paint all these."
It does not say how long it will take to paint all these, just that the process of painting "all these" will begin when the shattering of the holy people is finished. So when we substitute "complete" for "paint" we see the meaning more clearly. It is not at that time that "all these will be completed" but that at that time "they will complete all these".
Furthermore, who or what is the subject of "they will complete"? It is third person plural and feminine. The rules of grammar usually require us to look at the immediate context to find the closest noun that matches the number and gender of the verb: in this case plural and feminine. This gender and number only matches the noun at the end of verse 6: "the wonders" (not "these" but just "the" in Hebrew), which is here plural and feminine in form.
So then, supplying the subject from verse 6, into the grammar of verse 7, we get:
"when the shattering of the power of the holy people is finished, (the wonders) will complete all these".
Now we must ask what are "all these"? Normally in Hebrew the grammar of a sentence goes, 1) verb 2) subject 3) object / direct object. For example, Genesis 1:1 reads "bre[color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color] bara elohim et hashamayim v'et haaretz" or literally, "in the beginning created God the heavens and the earth". Here in Daniel 12:7, the text at the end of the verse reads, "...tikleynah kol elleh" or literally, "will complete all these". I suggest that the meaning is the same: "all these" is the subject of the verb and the antecedent of "all these" is "the wonders". So we should translate the passage literally like this:
Daniel 12:6-7 And one said to the man dressed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, "How long will it be until the end of the wonders?" 7 I heard the man dressed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, as he raised his right hand and his left toward heaven, and swore by Him who lives forever that it would be for a time, times, and half a time; and when the shattering the power of the holy people is finished, all these wonders will bring the process to completion.
Now that doesn't make a lot of sense in common English, but when we remember that the word "wonders" always (except once) refers to what God does then things start falling into place. The power of God acts within history as "wonders"--events caused by His hand, historical events that form a process, a process that God will complete. God's wondrous acts within human history will eventually complete the purpose and goal that He wills.
Zechariah 7:13-8:8 describes the very shattering of the power of the holy people and the wonders to follow that complete the process of God's purpose and plan for history with regard to Israel--even the same word is used for "wonders":
Zechariah 7:13 - 8:8 13 "And just as He called and they would not listen, so they called and I would not listen," says the LORD of hosts; 14 "but I scattered them with a storm wind among all the nations whom they have not known. Thus the land is desolated behind them so that no one went back and forth, for they made the pleasant land desolate." 8:1 Then the word of the LORD of hosts came, saying, 2 "Thus says the LORD of hosts, 'I am exceedingly jealous for Zion, yes, with great wrath I am jealous for her.' 3 "Thus says the LORD, 'I will return to Zion and will dwell in the midst of Jerusalem. Then Jerusalem will be called the City of Truth, and the mountain of the LORD of hosts will be called the Holy Mountain.' 4 "Thus says the LORD of hosts, 'Old men and old women will again sit in the streets of Jerusalem, each man with his staff in his hand because of age. 5 'And the streets of the city will be filled with boys and girls playing in its streets.' 6 "Thus says the LORD of hosts, 'If it is too wondrous in the sight of the remnant of this people in those days, will it also be too wondrous in My sight?' declares the LORD of hosts. 7 "Thus says the LORD of hosts, 'Behold, I am going to save My people from the land of the east and from the land of the west; 8 and I will bring them back and they will live in the midst of Jerusalem; and they shall be My people, and I will be their God in truth and righteousness.'
The word "pala" in Daniel 12:7 or "wonders" is translated above as "wondrous". The passage in Daniel 12 refers to the tribulation of the Jews, the period of their being scattered and trampled in the nations of the earth, as coming to an end after a "time, two times and half a time". After that period of their tribulation runs its course, God will do His wonders and bring the Jews back to Israel, restore them and ultimately save them by His grace before resurrecting those whom He saves. We have seen in the history of the 20th century that much of this has passed from prediction into history, from prophecy to fulfillment: the Jews' tribulation and scattering among the nations is largely finished and has been marked by noteworthy events like the birth of the state of Israel in 1948 and the military supremacy in the Middle East won by Israel in 1956, 1967, 1973, 1982 and even today.
I have a chart on my "time charts" page from my main site, www.historicism.com that describes much of this in a visual format.
Joe Haynes
Associate Pastor
High Level Evangelical Church
Notice - The featuring of a particular ministry does not constitute endorsement of every single item or point of view published by said ministry by each and every member of TheologyWeb leadership. We strive to have a varied cross-section of representations of differing opinions on secondary Christian issues. The only requirement for the featuring of a particular ministry is that said ministry subscribes to the essentials artictulated in the TheologyWeb statement of faith found here in our Mission Statement
"I'm hoping to rope enough corpses together to make a small raft." Mad_Gerbil, D&G
-
April 18th 2006, 06:05 AM #2
Blu Ray Laser Phaser
- Join Date
- February 8th, 2006
- Location
- Copenhagen
- Posts
- 32,406
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
Male - churchburnerRe: OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
This is a long article, so I will allow myself to pick out particular points that I have found confusing.
Ehh, how many different kinds of years are there? The text says "In the third year ...", so apparently we are to think of years as in, well, years.
Originally posted by Trout XIII
I'll ignore here that we have no evidence of a siege of Jerusalem in (or around) 606 bce - the first of Nebuchadnezzar's sieges was in 597 bce, but as said: I'll ignore this.
Ehh, what is this talk about Israel? Israel, as mentioned by Haynes, had ceased to exist some 115 years before the events in Daniel start! Daniel was from Judah, another kingdom, so what's the connection? Originally posted by Trout XIII
Anyway, if we equate Israel and Judah, we have an independent kingdom during the around 100 years of the Hasmoneans, so "the last times" would have started around 160 bce!
Oh, by the way, Daniel's idea appears to me to be that the last times indeed started then, but it does not appear to be, what haynes reads out of the book.
Ehh, how do we know that Rome was one of the empires? It's possible that it was, but what is the evidence? Originally posted by Trout XIII
Some people claim that this deals wtih the empire of Alexander the Great and its division into fragments, of which two, Ptolemaic Egypt and Seleucid Syria, entertained themselves by a series of wars. Originally posted by Trout XIII
Possibly Jesus interpreted it differently than Daniel? You know: prophecies never fail, they are merely reinterpreted! Originally posted by Trout XIII
This is going to fast - Daniel does not directly talk about any Jewish (that is, Judean) nation (what happened to Israel, while we are at it?) nation rising anywhere. But he does mention that "son of man"-look-alike that takes over the rule. This is presumably the archangel Michael, the national guardian angel of Judah, so, yes, this indicates some idea of Judah ruling over the world. Originally posted by Trout XIII
A minor point here: the Roman empire had split into a western and an eastern part before this, and the eastern part lasted until 1453 ce, though Judah (Judea) was lost to Sassanide Persia long before that, and they in turn lost it to the Arab Moslems not long after, so the fate of the western Roman empire is of little importance here. Originally posted by Trout XIII
How about the eastern Roman empire? Why doesn't it count? Originally posted by Trout XIII
The number of countries dividing the territory formerly under control by the western Roman empire has varied quite a lot during time, but ok, it can be counted up to 10 at the moment (omitting the part of Germany, that had been under Roman control) Originally posted by Trout XIII
How did Israel come back into the picture? Originally posted by Trout XIII
A "man-made" monster? Why that? Daniel's description of the other "beasts" is exactly copied from zoology books either! Originally posted by Trout XIII
Do we know this for sure? Even, if we do, that means that "Israel" was outside of the control of those 10 "kings" (until the crusades, that is). Originally posted by Trout XIII
Daniel talks about 10 "horns", that is, 10 kings, not 10 kingdoms, but more likely 10 kings over the same country. Originally posted by Trout XIII
Except they are NOT - not necessarily at least. Originally posted by Trout XIII
So, the little horn would be a little kingdom? No, it's the 10 horns that are 10 kings, not 10 kingdoms. Originally posted by Trout XIII
See, what I said: the 10 horns are 10 kings of the same kingdom. Originally posted by Trout XIII
They did? Originally posted by Trout XIII
Except it's 1260 days (= 3˝ years) Originally posted by Trout XIII
Why? And what does the pope have to do with Daniel? That book ends its story around 165 bce, long before 606 ce! Originally posted by Trout XIII
Why? The 2300 mornings and evenings refer to the two daily offerings in the temple, so how can they be converted to any kind of years? Originally posted by Trout XIII
Except that we are not dealing with 2300 lunar years! Originally posted by Trout XIII
Why? There is around 950 years between Alexander and the rise of Islam! Originally posted by Trout XIII
Isn't that just nice? Originally posted by Trout XIII
How do we know this? Originally posted by Trout XIII
Originally posted by Trout XIII
How does Christ come into the story?
Israel did not exist at that time! But it's refreshing that we are dealing with Greeks rather than Romans for once. Originally posted by Trout XIII
What has Jesus with this to do? Originally posted by Trout XIII
[QUOTE=Trout XIII]Verse 21 probably refers to Antiochus Epiphanes.
Verse 25 describes his invasion of Egypt against Ptolemy Philometor (see 1 Macabees 1), who was defeated because of the treachery of his own people.
Verse 28 see 1 Macabees 1:20-21.
Verse 30 the Roman Senate sent ships to force Antiochus to leave Alexandria alone. He was so furious about that defeat that he sent Appolonius to take his vengeance out on the Jews (1 Macabees 1:30; 2 Macabees 5:24). [/QUOTE9
Yes, the Romans do get a favorable mention a couple of times i Daniel, so they can't be any of the beasts!
- FreezBeeFrom darkness into light
Like icy shards from the broken mirror within
Melting in the tears from the stars in your eyes
Shining still brighter, still fainter through the darkness
The love between you and me, a trace of dawn
-
April 18th 2006, 12:03 PM #3
Pastor and Webmaster
---
- Join Date
- July 7th, 2003
- Location
- Hague, Saskatchewan, CA
- Posts
- 80
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
Male - ChristianRe: OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
Okay, and I will only try to clear up a couple of points about which you are confused, rather than respond to the many differences of opinion you express above. I'm not even going to bother engaging you on this (I'll leave that up to whoever has the time and inclination) because I see that you are a Confucian and therefore would have to abandon much of your belief system in order to agree with the essential theological message of Daniel's text. And btw, why are you bothering talking about this at all if you are not Jewish or Christian? Never mind, I'm sure you have your reasons. But there is little chance that you will ever see this text from Daniel's point of view (being a Confucian yourself) since you don't believe in the God that he served, the Messiah that he prophesied about or the atonement that He accomplished. Originally posted by FreezBee
As you may or may not be aware, the year we use (a solar year modified with intercalations, etc., according to the Gregorian Calendar) is not even now accepted by all nations. One solar year is the time it takes for the earth to revolved once around the Sun: 365.25 days. One lunar year is the time it takes for the moon to go through it's cycle 12 times: 354 days. One calendar year is a harmonization between solar and lunar years, taking 12 "months" of 30 days = 360 days.Ehh, how many different kinds of years are there? The text says "In the third year ...", so apparently we are to think of years as in, well, years.
You can learn more about this topic at Wikipedia, HERE.
As an example of the reason that I think it is futile to engage you on most of your objections: if you don't accept the authority of Scripture as the product of Divine inspiration, then why would you bother discussing a book of divinely inspired prophecies in that Scripture? If Scripture is wrong about the three stages of Jerusalem's fall to Nebuchadnezzar, then it is very likely wrong about its predictions of the future. However, I believe that Scripture is right about both.I'll ignore here that we have no evidence of a siege of Jerusalem in (or around) 606 bce - the first of Nebuchadnezzar's sieges was in 597 bce, but as said: I'll ignore this.
I did not say "kingdom" of Israel, I said, very deliberately, "nation" of Israel, referring to what was left of the 12 tribes, namely, the "kingdom" of Judah. This is how Daniel treats the national identity of the "kingdom" of Judah in Daniel 1:3; 9:7, 11, and 20. And also notice his contemporary, Ezekiel, who uses the term, "Israel" (in the 7th century BCE) 186 times, mostly in reference to his audience, more than three decades AFTER the fall of Samaria (the Northern Kingdom) in 721.
Ehh, what is this talk about Israel? Israel, as mentioned by Haynes, had ceased to exist some 115 years before the events in Daniel start! Daniel was from Judah, another kingdom, so what's the connection?
Because, as Isaac Newton observed, Daniel 7:12 says:
How about the eastern Roman empire? Why doesn't it count?
So when the text describes the emergence of 10 horns from the fourth beast, we are to understand that the other beasts remain, though without "dominion". Therefore the horns can only be looked for in the territory exclusive to the fourth beast: Western Europe.
I'm flattered that you took the time to read my article. I did not expect or anticipate that anyone except a few fellow-evangelical Christians would be the least bit interested in what I have to say about Daniel.
Joe (Historicism.com)
Check out my website (www.historicism.com) and my new forum (http://forum.historicism.com) and if your aren't scared away, let's reason together.
-
April 18th 2006, 01:01 PM #4
Pastor and Webmaster
---
- Join Date
- July 7th, 2003
- Location
- Hague, Saskatchewan, CA
- Posts
- 80
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
Male - ChristianRe: OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
Oops!
I don't know WHAT I was thinking? This sentence above:
Should read,And also notice his contemporary, Ezekiel, who uses the term, "Israel" (in the 7th century BCE) 186 times, mostly in reference to his audience, more than three decades AFTER the fall of Samaria (the Northern Kingdom) in 721.
And also notice his contemporary, Ezekiel, who uses the term, "Israel" (in the 7th century BCE) 186 times, mostly in reference to his audience, more than 13 decades AFTER the fall of Samaria (the Northern Kingdom) in 721.Last edited by Historicism.com; April 18th 2006 at 01:02 PM. Reason: Correction
Joe (Historicism.com)
Check out my website (www.historicism.com) and my new forum (http://forum.historicism.com) and if your aren't scared away, let's reason together.
-
April 18th 2006, 01:36 PM #5
Come, Lord Jesus!
---
- Join Date
- September 23rd, 2005
- Location
- Massachusetts
- Posts
- 686
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
Male - ChristianRe: OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
What Joe Haynes wrote here is not merely one man's opinion.
It reflects the prevailing view of Bible believers from before the Reformation until the early 1900's (when Dispensationalist thinking displaced Historicism in the seminaries and in most Protestant churches).
Thank you, Joe, for the time and effort that went into this fascinating presentation.
David
-
April 19th 2006, 06:56 AM #6
Blu Ray Laser Phaser
- Join Date
- February 8th, 2006
- Location
- Copenhagen
- Posts
- 32,406
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
Male - churchburnerRe: OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
This is the key point: Bible believers, not Christians Originally posted by David_A_Reed
Hello Joe! Originally posted by Historicism.com
By my own reckoning I am a Christian (liberal Lutheran), however because I am not a Bible believer I am not allowed to use a Christian icon at the TWeb. Not really knowing which other icon to use, I simply chose the next in line
Daniel (the author of Daniel) was not a Christian, but a Mosaic Jew - you point out quite well yourself his dependency on Mosaic law. Originally posted by Historicism.com
Assume you were a firm Mosaic Jew in mid 160ies bce. With Antiochus IV's desecration of the temple, what would you expect? According to other OT texts the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem, including the temple, was caused by the wrath of God for the transgressions during the time of King Manasseh, including the installation of a Baal altar in the temple.
Daniel mentions the Romans twice, but as opponents of Antiochus IV and his father, which does mean that he might have thought of the Romans as the IVth empire, but he might as well not have considered that possibility and hoped that this really was the end. I am not too sure about this, so I will accept the possibility that Daniel's IVth empire might be the Roman. But remember that Babylonia fell to the Medes and the Persians less than 50 years after the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem, so Daniel probably hoped for that the IVth empire wasn't to last for any long time. After all, there was around 3˝ years from the time that Antiochus IVth was sent home from Alexandria to the installation of the Zeus altar in the Jerusalem temple, and then 3˝ years from that to the Maccabean cleansing of the temple, so Daniel's fequent hints at "three times and a half" in various guises do, to me certainly, point at that he had thought that THIS was the end.
Ehh, where I live, a calendar year consists of 365 days, except in leap years that have 366 days. There is a leap year each fourth year except in years divisible by 400 (such as 2000, 2400 and so on). Originally posted by Historicism.com
Moslems do use a lunar year, and the official Jewish year is a compromise between solar years and lunar years.
So yes, there are different kinds of years - that's true. But since Daniel refers to various years in the reigns of various kings, it would appear to be to assume that by a "year" he meant, whichever time period in his time counted as a year.
There are a few answers to this. One is that, even assuming Divine inspiration for the Bible, there is still the small matter of interpretation. Various people interpret the Bible variously. So what's the value of Divine inspiration? It simply makes no difference - if the interpretation isn't equally Divinely inspired Originally posted by Historicism.com
No other biblical Book than Daniel mentions anything about a siege around 606 bce. Jeremiah gives many details about the sieges in 697 and 687/86, so shouldn't we expect that he would have mentioned the even more important siege in 606 bce? Daniel in return doesn't mention any later sieges, nor anything else that would have been of relevance, if he really was writing his book in the 6th century bce. Originally posted by Historicism.com
Ok, excuse me for my mistake Originally posted by Historicism.com
True, but then I would conjecture that you need to be consistent and not consider a modern state of Israel to be in anyway related to the Bible. Either Israel must refer to a state or a people, you can't have it both ways, can you? Originally posted by Historicism.com
Assuming the fourth beast to be Western Europe, that is! The 10 horns anyway represent 1o kings of the same kingdom, which of course limits our possibilities to Western European kingdoms that have had at least 10 kings. If that kingdom should be current, we are down to a somewhat limited number - especially, if those kingdoms need to have been part of the Western Roman empire! Originally posted by Historicism.com
Óh, the pleasure is all mine Originally posted by Historicism.com
I'm flattered that you took the time to read my article. I did not expect or anticipate that anyone except a few fellow-evangelical Christians would be the least bit interested in what I have to say about Daniel.
- FreezBeeFrom darkness into light
Like icy shards from the broken mirror within
Melting in the tears from the stars in your eyes
Shining still brighter, still fainter through the darkness
The love between you and me, a trace of dawn
-
April 19th 2006, 12:21 PM #7
Pastor and Webmaster
---
- Join Date
- July 7th, 2003
- Location
- Hague, Saskatchewan, CA
- Posts
- 80
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
Male - ChristianRe: OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
I'm heading out of town for a few days but thought I should post a response to this post of yours, rather than leave you hanging. You have raised some points that are worth discussing about Daniel. You seem to reflect a fairly typical, liberal and non-evangelical understanding of Daniel that fails to take Daniel seriously as a prophet who understood his writings to be a record of Divine inspiration. The issue of interpretation is a secondary issue to that of inspiration. Without basic agreement on inspiration, the discussion of interpretation is futile. Originally posted by FreezBee
This is the key point: Bible believers, not Christians
Hello Joe!
By my own reckoning I am a Christian (liberal Lutheran), however because I am not a Bible believer I am not allowed to use a Christian icon at the TWeb. Not really knowing which other icon to use, I simply chose the next in line
Daniel (the author of Daniel) was not a Christian, but a Mosaic Jew - you point out quite well yourself his dependency on Mosaic law.
Assume you were a firm Mosaic Jew in mid 160ies bce. With Antiochus IV's desecration of the temple, what would you expect? According to other OT texts the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem, including the temple, was caused by the wrath of God for the transgressions during the time of King Manasseh, including the installation of a Baal altar in the temple.
Daniel mentions the Romans twice, but as opponents of Antiochus IV and his father, which does mean that he might have thought of the Romans as the IVth empire, but he might as well not have considered that possibility and hoped that this really was the end. I am not too sure about this, so I will accept the possibility that Daniel's IVth empire might be the Roman. But remember that Babylonia fell to the Medes and the Persians less than 50 years after the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem, so Daniel probably hoped for that the IVth empire wasn't to last for any long time. After all, there was around 3˝ years from the time that Antiochus IVth was sent home from Alexandria to the installation of the Zeus altar in the Jerusalem temple, and then 3˝ years from that to the Maccabean cleansing of the temple, so Daniel's fequent hints at "three times and a half" in various guises do, to me certainly, point at that he had thought that THIS was the end.
Ehh, where I live, a calendar year consists of 365 days, except in leap years that have 366 days. There is a leap year each fourth year except in years divisible by 400 (such as 2000, 2400 and so on).
Moslems do use a lunar year, and the official Jewish year is a compromise between solar years and lunar years.
So yes, there are different kinds of years - that's true. But since Daniel refers to various years in the reigns of various kings, it would appear to be to assume that by a "year" he meant, whichever time period in his time counted as a year.
There are a few answers to this. One is that, even assuming Divine inspiration for the Bible, there is still the small matter of interpretation. Various people interpret the Bible variously. So what's the value of Divine inspiration? It simply makes no difference - if the interpretation isn't equally Divinely inspired
No other biblical Book than Daniel mentions anything about a siege around 606 bce. Jeremiah gives many details about the sieges in 697 and 687/86, so shouldn't we expect that he would have mentioned the even more important siege in 606 bce? Daniel in return doesn't mention any later sieges, nor anything else that would have been of relevance, if he really was writing his book in the 6th century bce.
Ok, excuse me for my mistake
True, but then I would conjecture that you need to be consistent and not consider a modern state of Israel to be in anyway related to the Bible. Either Israel must refer to a state or a people, you can't have it both ways, can you?
Assuming the fourth beast to be Western Europe, that is! The 10 horns anyway represent 1o kings of the same kingdom, which of course limits our possibilities to Western European kingdoms that have had at least 10 kings. If that kingdom should be current, we are down to a somewhat limited number - especially, if those kingdoms need to have been part of the Western Roman empire!
Óh, the pleasure is all mine
- FreezBee
Thanks for clearing up for me the matter of your worldview. However, I would not take the time to discuss the relative merrits of Dodge versus General Motors (as if the two are even comparable!) with an Omish person who uses a horse and buggy. I would also not wish to engage a vegan on the issue of which has a richer flavour: sirloin or prime rib?
You call yourself a Christian, but TW is quite right to restrict the use of the Christian icon to people who believe the Bible as the standard for faith and doctrine (I would say the "sole rule for faith and doctrine" but that rules out some who also consider Tradition to be an authoritative interpreter of Scripture, though I myself do not consider Tradition to be of an equivalent authority to Scripture). Even calling yourself a Lutheran, however liberal, is a bit of a slap in Luther's face since he would have been reluctant to share his name with anyone who does not believe in God's Word as found in Scripture. So as far as I'm concerned, it is not worth my time discussing with you the issues you raise from Daniel. I would be more than happy to discuss the authority of Scripture with you in another venue as I have the time. And then, if you ever come around to a Christian perspective of Scripture, we could resume this discussion.
I hope you don't read into what I have written any negative "tone of voice". I respect what you have to say and am sure I could learn a thing or two from a discussion with you. But I decline to spend my time, precious as it is, discussing the interpretation of Daniel with a person who does not even believe in the inspiration of Daniel.
Joe (Historicism.com)
Check out my website (www.historicism.com) and my new forum (http://forum.historicism.com) and if your aren't scared away, let's reason together.
-
April 22nd 2006, 02:10 PM #8
limmud
---
- Join Date
- February 8th, 2003
- Location
- Florida
- Posts
- 890
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
Male - ChristianRe: OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
An extremely important point. To which I add another. In 2:42, the description of the feet of iron mixed with clay commonly is translated to say, “It shall be a divided kingdom.” But the verb “be” is in the peal imperfect, and carries the import of “shall become.” Thus, the vision does not have five stages (gold, silver, brass, iron, and stone), it has six stages (gold, silver, brass, iron, iron mixed with clay, and stone). These are distinct and successive. Originally posted by Trout XIII
Actually, Bill Shea has shown that the Aramaic section is actually a chiasm, (I’ll look up the details when I get home). The entire book is a unity, and suggesting that 8-12 are primarily Jewish while 2-7 are Gentile does a disservice to the book.However, Daniel 2:4 begins a section written in Aramaic-a Gentile language-that describes the actions of God through history as Gentile kingdoms are allowed to trample under-foot the nation of Israel.
There is a pattern that may join us together, however. Each revelation begins geopolitical and ends spiritual. 2 is easy to see. 7 does the same thing with a larger spiritual section. 8-9 (it’s one revelation, explicitly noted in 8:26 and 9:23) echoes this pattern with even more spiritual material, and 11-12 is even more so. Thus, while each revelation starts with politics and ends with redemption, as we go from the first to the last revelation, we see progressively greater emphasis on redemptive issues.
Again, key.However he impersonates a faithful servant of the Most High, claiming to serve while he blasphemes.
Actually, historians don’t agree on this. But Daniel provides the proper understanding in 1:20, where he and his friends were “ten times better” than their peers. “Ten” is a round number, and is used idiomatically in both places to mean somewhat greater then several and less than many.The sequence of the events of these prophecies suggest that the little blasphemous horn and the other 10 kings appear just after the collapse of the unified Roman Empire. That took place fully and finally in 476 AD. Historians agree that there have been an average of 10 kingdoms/countries in that formerly Roman territory ever since.
THE 2,300 DAYS.
The start of this period is not one that requires special inspiration. Rather, the Hebrew is quite explicit. I’ve explored this at length other places, so I’ll present this as a summary only.
Daniel did not understand the mar’eh of the 2,300 days (8:14, 26). In 9:23, Gabriel says that he has come to give Daniel understanding of that mar’eh. Then 9:24 says literally that “70 weeks have been amputated.” They have to be cut off from something. This is the 2,300 days, since that is what is being explained. Then in 9:25, the starting point for both is given with the decree specifications. Those specs fit only Ezra 7, and the date is 457BC.
Good observation.What is the "regular sacrifice" mentioned in verse 12 and elsewhere? In Hebrew, the word "sacrifice" is not present. The phrase is really just the Hebrew word meaning "continual". "The continual" is not burnt offerings, but the whole regular worship of God - in this case the regular public worship of God.
This is an absolutely crucial observation. And it is denied by Dispys. They call it a list of blessings.The time period, "seventy weeks" (v 24) appears to be a deadline that applies to the Jews and the city of Jerusalem (v 24).
Re: Chapter 9.
While we might quibble on an occasional point, in all, an excellent presentation.
We will have to disagree on chapter 11. The key here is that in verse 22 we see “the prince of the covenant.” Grammatically and contextually, this refers back to Jesus, as you should note from your excellent discussion of the syntax of 9:25-27. Since all the revelations in the book are sequential until the Q&A sections, anything after verse 22 must be after the cross.
You may benefit from doing a bit of basic scriptural research. But first, note that the King of the North is the king who controls Babylon. In the beginning it is physical Babylon, but by verse 23 it is spiritual Babylon, in concert with Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Revelation. Thus, the K/N in 40 is apostate religion. The rest is geographic metaphor. The “beautiful land” is true Christianity (note: “many will fall,” not “many countries will fall”). Egypt, Lybia, and Nubia are a trading block (look it up!) representing atheistic commercialism, and “Edom, Moab, and the chiefest of the sons of Ammon” (none of which exist any more) are Islam, the sworn enemy of anything labeled “Israel.” Fit those in the picture of those six verses and you’ll see how it fits. I didn’t get it until I started the word search on those terms.Verses 40-45 may cover the history of the Middle East from the Balfour Declaration to the Six Day War in 1967, but it is still probably too early to tell. At least I am uncomfortable attaching any level of dogmatism to the interpretation of these verses since I suspect they have not been completely fulfilled yet.
In essence, it says that as we approach the end of time, false worship will be ascendant. It will cause some true worshipers to fall, but the sworn enemies of Christianity (NT “Israel”) will not be affected (Islam). On the other hand, commercial interests, with no dog in the religious fight (to mix a metaphor), will do what ever is needed to make a buck, following at the heels of false religion, searching for financial advantage. Somehow this looks vaguely like what is happening today...
FreezBee,
Hebrew (Jewish) years are solar... on average. A specific year may have either 12 or 13 months, depending on the seasons. First, months are lunar, averaging 29 1/2 days long. Thus, 12 months is 354 days. But since the festivals (Lev 23) are spring and fall, they would rapidly become winter and summer, so in 7 of 19 years (on average), an extra month (Adar 2) was added. Thus, when we look at the long sweep of years, such as 483 or 490 in the Daniel 9 prophecy, they nicely match our modern Gregorian calendar. That is, they are solar years. Unfortunately, we simply have no information about how long any single historical year was.
TedTed Noel, Webmaster, The Bible Only. If the Bible doesn't teach it, neither will we.
BibleOnly Press.
Home of
I Want to be Left Behind, an analysis and refutation of the Left Behind theology, with presentation of the biblical plan for end-times; and Bible study materials by Gold Medallion Award winner Lee Gugliotto Ph.D.
A Primer on the Book of Daniel
A Primer on the Book of Revelation
All available at amazon.com
-
April 22nd 2006, 04:19 PM #9
tWebber
---
- Join Date
- January 2nd, 2005
- Posts
- 857
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
Male - Christianity+Re: OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
A minor technicality, although it doesn't alter FreezBee's argument here: Leap years occur every 4th year, but is omitted every even 100 years, but then is reinserted every 400th year. Hence, there was no leap year in 1700, 1800 or 1900 in the Gregorian calendar, but there was in 2000. But I agree, trying to define a year as 360 days is stretching it. Babylonians, Persians, Greeks and Israelites all used lunar calendars of 12 or 13 lunar months. I have seen the efforts of Sir Robert Anderson to force his definition of a "prophetic year," and I just can't buy it. Originally posted by FreezBee
I respect Trout's view that the Book of Daniel is a Divinely revealed prophetic writing by Daniel during the captivity of Babylon, but I can't accept the historicist interpretation, if I understand that to mean that certain passages refer to Europe and the United States after the fall of Rome.
-
April 22nd 2006, 04:27 PM #10
d-dizzle fo shizzle
- Join Date
- January 27th, 2003
- Location
- yxboom's spacious head
- Posts
- 49,651
- Mentioned
- 4 Post(s)
Female - ChristianRe: OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
clarification - Trout posted this article as Admin Editor, but Joe (historicism.com) wrote it.
Nochyu mokraya ptitsa nikogda ne letaet.
A wet bird never flies at night. -unknown [old Russian proverb]
Eudyptes: you are....as usual....100% correct
-
April 24th 2006, 07:20 AM #11
Blu Ray Laser Phaser
- Join Date
- February 8th, 2006
- Location
- Copenhagen
- Posts
- 32,406
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
Male - churchburnerRe: OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
Thanks for taking your time to respond, and I'll will let you have the last word here Originally posted by Historicism.com
I hope you don't read into what I have written any negative "tone of voice". I respect what you have to say and am sure I could learn a thing or two from a discussion with you. But I decline to spend my time, precious as it is, discussing the interpretation of Daniel with a person who does not even believe in the inspiration of Daniel.
Thanks for the correction - for some reason I always get that wrong with the 100 years Originally posted by wfaber
- FreezBeeFrom darkness into light
Like icy shards from the broken mirror within
Melting in the tears from the stars in your eyes
Shining still brighter, still fainter through the darkness
The love between you and me, a trace of dawn
-
April 24th 2006, 01:32 PM #12
CessetMilleAnnorumFabula
- Join Date
- June 25th, 2003
- Location
- Texas
- Posts
- 2,394
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
Male - ChristianRe: OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
I have a question. Who was the first person to interpret Daniel's fourth beast/image section as Rome/Roman empire? I think I know the answer, but I'll let someone else take a shot at it.
TREES OF LIFE AND KNOWLEDGE at YouTube
APOCALYPTIC WISDOM
EBOOK DOWNLOAD - THE GOSPEL PROPHECY: The Bible as Allegory
What can be accepted as truth isn't different from what was taught to the early church in the apostolic tradition.
-
April 24th 2006, 11:43 PM #13
Pastor and Webmaster
---
- Join Date
- July 7th, 2003
- Location
- Hague, Saskatchewan, CA
- Posts
- 80
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
Male - ChristianRe: OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
Thanks for the comments and insights, Ted. I will look into your suggestions and get back to you as appropriate.
Eschaton, I'm pretty sure where you are going with that and I'm not really interested in hashing it out again with you. I'll leave that to someone with time to kill.
Originally posted by Ted
Joe (Historicism.com)
Check out my website (www.historicism.com) and my new forum (http://forum.historicism.com) and if your aren't scared away, let's reason together.
-
April 25th 2006, 11:21 AM #14
CessetMilleAnnorumFabula
- Join Date
- June 25th, 2003
- Location
- Texas
- Posts
- 2,394
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
Male - ChristianRe: OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
I was going somewhere? I just asked a question for anybody to answer. I wan't trying to critisize you. But that's okay. Don't feel pressured to answer. I suppose it would be more proper to ask in another thread since this one is about your article I guess. Originally posted by Historicism.com
God bless,
AFTREES OF LIFE AND KNOWLEDGE at YouTube
APOCALYPTIC WISDOM
EBOOK DOWNLOAD - THE GOSPEL PROPHECY: The Bible as Allegory
What can be accepted as truth isn't different from what was taught to the early church in the apostolic tradition.
-
April 25th 2006, 01:08 PM #15
Adjunct Professor
- Join Date
- September 25th, 2003
- Location
- Colorado
- Posts
- 14,507
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
Male - ChristianRe: OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
Quote
Similar Threads
-
FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: by Storico
By Trout in forum Editorial Dept.Replies: 13Last Post: April 30th 2010, 02:56 AM -
FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: by Storico
By Trout in forum Editorial Dept.Replies: 11Last Post: January 27th 2008, 10:14 AM -
OUR FEATURED MEMBER ARTICLE: Interpreting Daniel by Joe Haynes
By Trout in forum Eschatology 201Replies: 0Last Post: April 16th 2006, 08:07 PM
Rip BSA
Yesterday, 08:29 PM in Civics 101