Why 30's ad?

[Kris]

Ok, this is an offshoot of my attempting to understand Daniel better. The information I am looking for has to do with why the Jesus story developed in the 30's ad? Could it have been due to different sects looking through what they thought to be prophecies of the messiah and then trying to find timelines that could give them dates?

One example would be Daniel. Most people know that this addresses Antiochus' time. However, not all the prophecies came true, and the world didn't end-- the messiah didn't come (at least according to the Jews) and life went on. So, the writings had to be reinterpeted-- and now, different start dates calculated. If we go with Artaxerxes decree, we can "move the goalposts" as spin would say. Using either of his decrees, you end up in anywhere from the 20-40ad arena. Could this be how Jesus supposed death fits this secondary timeline?

Perhaps even Jesus was a follower of this messianic expectation-- and if he was a real man during this time, tried to get himself offed when he thought he would most likely meet the prophecy timeline? or if his story was interjected by later writers, could they have used Daniel to identify the 30's or there about as a good timeline for him to meet these suppposed prophecies?

I believe that this is what Richard Carrier thinks.

Or is it all coincidence? I don't like coincidences.

[ghost]

Jesus is Divus Iulius combined with Ishu. The ones who combined them were influenced by Roman and Jewish culture. Maybe they were descendants of Roman veterans in the Levant.

[neilgodfrey]

Do we have any evidence to inform us that among the Judeans of that day there was ever any interest in predicting a time for a messiah to arrive?

[Kris]

Richard Carrier seems to think that there was definite messianic belief amongst some Jewish sects or at least he seems to assert that in a few articles I have read from him. He also thinks that the ancient prophecy that that Josephus mentions when he talks about why the Jews went to war may have been Daniel and it being reinterpted to their times. He also uses that fact that early church fathers seems to arrive at the 30's ad for Daniel (particularily Africanus). Richard also talks about Josephus wrtining about a number of wannabe messiahs that got themselves killed through the years of the first century.

As far as DSS go, there seems to be some interesting messianic stuff in them-- Mechelzidick and such-- but I don't have references handy. I think the Gabriel Stone could also be an indicator of early messianic beliefs-- and it came before Jesus apparently! Perhaps Jesus was a part of this type of messianic sect. I have read that John the Baptist was also messianic-- so that could be where some christian notions originated?

Anyway, that is a bit of what I know related to messiahism in the first century. It could explain a few things-- at least in my mind anyway. I have a really hard time dealing with the Christian interptetation of Daniel and how they say it lines up to Jesus death. However, if the christians wanted their Jesus to line up with this prophecy to try to show him as the messiah-- even though he really didn't do what the messiah was supposed to, I can explain away the coincidence of the date quite handily.

[neilgodfrey]

Richard Carrier seems to think that there was definite messianic belief amongst some Jewish sects or at least he seems to assert that in a few articles I have read from him. He also thinks that the ancient prophecy that that Josephus mentions when he talks about why the Jews went to war may have been Daniel and it being reinterpted to their times. He also uses that fact that early church fathers seems to arrive at the 30's ad for Daniel (particularily Africanus). Richard also talks about Josephus wrtining about a number of wannabe messiahs that got themselves killed through the years of the first century.

As far as DSS go, there seems to be some interesting messianic stuff in them-- Mechelzidick and such-- but I don't have references handy. I think the Gabriel Stone could also be an indicator of early messianic beliefs-- and it came before Jesus apparently! Perhaps Jesus was a part of this type of messianic sect. I have read that John the Baptist was also messianic-- so that could be where some christian notions originated?

Anyway, that is a bit of what I know related to messiahism in the first century. It could explain a few things-- at least in my mind anyway. I have a really hard time dealing with the Christian interptetation of Daniel and how they say it lines up to Jesus death. However, if the christians wanted their Jesus to line up with this prophecy to try to show him as the messiah-- even though he really didn't do what the messiah was supposed to, I can explain away the coincidence of the date quite handily.

Other scholars have suggested Josephus might have been referring to the Sibylline Oracles re the prophecy of a ruler to come from Judea. I have not read Carrier's articles but would be interested in the evidence he cites, and the evidence that such documents were part of the popular thinking of the day. The Gospel of Matthew's story of the Nativity suggests to me, and this is just an aside really, that the author was conscious of how unexpected and unnatural it was to have a messiah turn up at the time Jesus supposedly did. No-one knew why the magis were there to look for a messiah and Herod had to ask the leading priests to go off and do a bit of research from their scriptures.

Several of the names Josephus mentions are bandits or declared themselves kings but they had no apparent intention to rule all of Judea. There is no evidence they were seen by anyone as "messiahs".

The only early evidence we have for John the Baptist being messianic is the gospels. Josephus in fact says things that would deny his messianic interest. If John the Baptist (or Jesus) were known messianists there is no way Josephus would have spoken kindly of them.

The Church Fathers, of course, are looking back to find prophetic rationales for Christ's appearance and are not evidence of Jewish expectations in the early first century.

I know most scholars seem to say there was this widespread messianic expectation at the time but I have never seen them provide evidence for it -- or the evidence they have offered strikes me as being very esoteric and something of interest only to a subgroup of the literate elite.

[DCHindley]

Ok, this is an offshoot of my attempting to understand Daniel better. The information I am looking for has to do with why the Jesus story developed in the 30's ad? Could it have been due to different sects looking through what they thought to be prophecies of the messiah and then trying to find timelines that could give them dates?

Below is a list of passages in "apostolic" and other early church fathers in which Daniel 9:23-27 is discussed. The way that these writers attack the problem of making this pericope refer to the coming of Jesus Christ in his day is not that much different than the way Christian fundamentalists make the pericope refer to this day (see any dispensational tract of the late 1960s and 1970s, Gog & Mat Gog refer to the Russkies and the eastern satellites in the USSR, the ten kings refer to the European Union, etc). :

ANF vol 1, 138: Ep. Barnabas ch 4: ... The final stumbling-block (or source of danger) approaches, concerning which it is written, as Enoch12 says, "For for this end the Lord has cut short the times and the days, that His Beloved may hasten; and He will come to the inheritance." And the prophet also speaks thus: "Ten kingdoms shall reign upon the earth, and a little king shall rise up after them, who shall subdue under one three of the kings."13 In like manner Daniel says concerning the same, "And I beheld the fourth beast, wicked and powerful, and more savage than all the beasts of the earth, and how from it sprang up ten horns, and out of them a little budding horn, and how it subdued under one three of the great horns."14 Ye ought therefore to understand. And this also I further beg of you, as being one of you, and loving you both individually and collectively more than my own soul, to take heed now to yourselves, and not to be like some, adding largely to your sins, and saying, "The covenant is both theirs and ours."15 But they thus finally lost it, after Moses had already received it.

12) The Latin reads, "Daniel" instead of "Enoch;" comp. Dan. 9.24-27. [I think that this may allude in some way to 1Enoch 1:3-4 "3 ... My great holy one will go forth from his habitation, 4 and the God of eternity will walk upon the earth, upon Mount Sinai and he will appear from his camp, and he will appear in the power of his might from the heaven of heavens" and 3:6-9 "6 ... but all those without sin will rejoice, and there will be for you release from sin and all mercy and peace and kindness, there will be salvation for you, a good light, and they will inherit the earth and to all you sinners there is no salvation, but upon you all (will be) destruction (and) curses. 7 But light to the elect and grace and peace, and you will inherit the earth, but there will be cursing towards the ungodly. 8 Then he will give light and grace to the elect, and they will inherit the earth. Then wisdom will be given to the all the elect, and all these will live, and in no wise will they sin again -- not against the truth, neither according to pride, and there will in a human a light illuminated and in a human an understanding mind, and in no wise will they trespass. 9 Neither those who sin all the days of their life, and surely not those who die in wrath and anger, but they will fulfill the number of their days of life, and their life will grow in peace, and he will multiply the years of their joy in gladness and eternal peace in all the days of their life."]
13) Dan. 7.24, very loosely quoted.
14) Dan. 7.7, 8, also very inaccurately cited.
15) We here follow the Latin text in preference to the Greek, which reads merely, "the covenant is ours." What follows seems to show the correctness of the Latin, as the author proceeds to deny that the Jews had any further interest in the promises.

ANF 1, 147: Ep. Barnabas ch 16: Let us inquire, then, if there still is a temple of God. There is -- where He himself declared He would make and finish it. For it is written, "And it shall come to pass, when the week is completed, the temple of God shall be built in glory in the name of the Lord."15

15) Dan. 9.24-27; Hag. 2.10.

ANF 1, 554: Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 5.25: And then he (the angel Gabriel from Daniel 7) points out the time that his tyranny shall last, during which the saints shall be put to flight, they who offer a pure sacrifice unto God: "And in the midst of the week," he says, "the sacrifice and the libation shall be taken away, and the abomination of desolation [shall be brought] into the temple: even unto the consummation of the time shall the desolation be complete."8 Now three years and six months constitute the half-week.

8) Dan. 9.27.

ANF 2, 329: Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies, 1.21: From the captivity at Babylon, which took place in the time of Jeremiah the prophet, was fulfilled what was spoken by Daniel the prophet as follows: "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to seal sins, and to wipe out and make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal the vision and the prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies. Know therefore, and understand, that from the going forth of the word commanding an answer to be given, and Jerusalem to be built, to Christ the Prince, are seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; and the street shall be again built, and the wall; and the times shall be expended. And after the sixty-two weeks the anointing shall be overthrown, and judgment shall not be in him; and he shall destroy the city and the sanctuary along with the coming Prince. And they shall be destroyed in a flood, and to the end of the war shall be cut off by desolations. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; and in the middle of the week the sacrifice and oblation shall be taken away; and in the holy place shall be the abomination of desolations, and until the consummation of time shall the consummation be assigned for desolation. And in the midst of the week shall he make the incense of sacrifice cease, and of the wing of destruction, even till the consummation, like the destruction of the oblation."1 That the temple accordingly was built in seven weeks, is evident; for it is written in Esdras. And thus Christ became King of the Jews, reigning in Jerusalem in the fulfilment of the seven weeks. And in the sixty and two weeks the whole of Judaea was quiet, and without wars. And Christ our Lord, "the Holy of Holies," having come and fulfilled the vision and the prophecy, was anointed in His flesh by the Holy Spirit of His Father. In those "sixty and two weeks," as the prophet said, and "in the one week," was He Lord. The half of the week Nero held sway, and in the holy city Jerusalem placed the abomination; and in the half of the week he was taken away, and Otho, and Galba, and Vitellius. And Vespasian rose to the supreme power, and destroyed Jerusalem, and desolated the holy place. And that such are the facts of the case, is clear to him that is able to understand, as the prophet said.

1) Dan. 9.24-27.

ANF 3, 158-159: Tertullian, An Answer to the Jews, Ch 8: Of the Times of Christ’s Birth and Passion, and of Jerusalem’s Destruction.

[158] ... Accordingly the times must be inquired into of the predicted and future nativity of the Christ, and of His passion, and of the extermination of the city of Jerusalem, that is, its devastation. For Daniel says, that “both the holy city and the holy place are exterminated together with the coming Leader, and that the pinnacle is destroyed unto ruin.”7 And so the times of the coming Christ, the Leader,8 must be inquired into, which we shall trace in Daniel; and, after computing them, shall prove Him to be come, even on the ground of the times prescribed, and of competent signs and operations of His. Which matters we prove, again, on the ground of the consequences which were ever announced as to follow His advent; in order that we may believe all to have been as well fulfilled as foreseen.

In such wise, therefore, did Daniel predict concerning Him, as to show both when and in what time He was to set the nations free; and how, after the passion of the Christ, that city had to be exterminated. For he says thus: “In the first year under Darius, son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, who reigned over the kingdom of the Chaldees, I Daniel understood in the books the number of the years.…And while I was yet speaking in my prayer, behold, the man Gabriel, whom I saw in the vision in the beginning, flying; and he touched me, as it were, at the hour of the evening sacrifice, and made me understand, and spake with me, and said, Daniel I am now come out to imbue thee with understanding; in the beginning of thy supplication went out a word. And I am come to announce to thee, because thou art a man [159] of desires;1 and ponder thou on the word, and understand in the vision. Seventy hebdomads have been abridged2 upon thy commonalty, and upon the holy city, until delinquency be made inveterate, and sins sealed, and righteousness obtained by entreaty, and righteousness eternal introduced; and in order that vision and prophet may be sealed, and an holy one of holy ones anointed. And thou shalt know, and thoroughly see, and understand, from the going forth of a word for restoring and rebuilding Jerusalem unto the Christ, the Leader, hebdomads (seven and an half, and3) lxii {62} and an half: and it shall convert, and shall be built into height and entrenchment, and the times shall be renewed: and after these lxii {62} hebdomads shall the anointing be exterminated, and shall not be; and the city and the holy place shall he exterminate together with the Leader, who is making His advent; and they shall be cut short as in a deluge, until (the) end of a war, which shall be cut short unto ruin. And he shall confirm a testament in many. In one hebdomad and the half of the hebdomad shall be taken away my sacrifice and libation, and in the holy place the execration of devastation, (and4) until the end of (the) time consummation shall be given with regard to this devastation.”5

Observe we, therefore, the limit, — how, in truth, he predicts that there are to be lxx {70} hebdomads, within which if they receive Him, “it shall be built into height and entrenchment, and the times shall be renewed.” But God, foreseeing what was to be—that they will not merely not receive Him, but will both persecute and deliver Him to death—both recapitulated, and said, that in lx {60} and ii {2} and an half of an hebdomad He is born, and an holy one of holy ones is anointed; but that when vii {7} hebdomads6 and an half were fulfilling, He had to suffer, and the holy city had to be exterminated after one and an half hebdomad — whereby namely, the seven and an half hebdomads have been completed. For he says thus: “And the city and the holy place to be exterminated together with the leader who is to come; and they shall be cut short as in a deluge; and he shall destroy the pinnacle unto ruin.”7 Whence, therefore, do we show that the Christ came within the lxii {62} and an half hebdomads? We shall count, moreover, from the first year of Darius, as at this particular time is shown to Daniel this particular vision; for he says, “And understand and conjecture that at the completion of thy word8 I make thee these answers.” Whence we are bound to compute from the first year of Darius, when Daniel saw this vision.

158n1) See Acts 2.9, 10; but comp. ver. 5.
158n2) See Isa. xlv. 1, 2 (especially in Lowth’s version and the LXX.).
158n3) See 1 Kings 4.25. (In the LXX. it is 3 Kings 4.25; but the verse is omitted in Tischendorf’s text, ed. Lips. 1860, though given in his footnotes there.) The statement in the text differs slightly from Oehler’s reading; where I suspect there is a transposition of a syllable, and that for “in finibus Judae tantum, a Bersabeae,” we ought to read “in finibus Judaeae tantum, a Bersabe.” See de Jej. c. ix.
158n4) See Esth. 1.1; 8.9.
158n5) [Dr. Allix thinks these statements define the Empire after Severus, and hence accepts the date we have mentioned, for this treatise.]
158n6) Comp. John 20.28.
158n7) See Dan. 9.26 (especially in the LXX.).
158n8) Comp. Isa. 55.4.
159n1) Vir desideriorum; Gr. ἀνὴρ ἐπιθυμιῶν; Eng. ver. “a man greatly beloved.” Elsewhere Tertullian has another rendering—“miserabilis.” See de Jej. cc. vii, ix.
159n2 Or, “abbreviated;” breviatae sunt; Gr. συνετμήθνσαν. For this rendering, and the interpretations which in ancient and modern days have been founded on it, see G. S. Faber’s Dissert. on the prophecy of the seventy weeks, pp. 5, 6, 109–112. (London, 1811.) The whole work will repay perusal.
159n3) These words are given, by Oehler and Rig., on the authority of Pamelius. The mss. and early editions are without them.
159n4) Also supplied by Pamelius.
159n5) See Dan. 9.24-27. It seemed best to render with the strictest literality, without regard to anything else; as an idea will thus then be given of the condition of the text, which, as it stands, differs widely, as will be seen, from the Hebrew and also from the LXX., as it stands in the ed. Tisch. Lips. 1860, to which I always adapt my references.
159n6) Hebdomades is preferred to Oehler’s [Hebdomad]-as, a reading which he follows apparently on slender authority.
159n7) There is no trace of these last words in Tischendorf’s LXX. here; and only in his footnotes is the “pinnacle” mentioned.
159n8) Or, “speech.” The reference seems to be to ver. 23, but there is no such statement in Daniel.

ANF 3, 353: Tertullian, Against Marcion, 4.7: My present discussion is, how the evil spirit could have known that He [Jesus as Holy One of God, Luke 4.34] was called by such a name, when there had never at any time been uttered about Him a single prophecy by a god who was unknown, and up to that time silent, of whom it was not possible for Him to be attested as “the Holy One,” as (of a god) unknown even to his own Creator. What similar event could he then have published7 of a new deity, whereby he might betoken for “the holy one” of the rival god? Simply that he went into the synagogue, and did nothing even in word against the Creator? As therefore he could not by any means acknowledge him, whom he was ignorant of, to be Jesus and the Holy One of God; so did he acknowledge Him whom he knew (to be both). For he remembered how that the prophet had prophesied8 of “the Holy One” of God, and how that God’s name of “Jesus” was in the son of Nun.9

7) Quid tale ediderit.
8) Ps. 16.10, and probably Dan. 9.24.
9) Compare what was said above in [Against Marcion] book 3., chap. 16. p. 335. [Chapter 16.—The Sacred Name Jesus Most Suited to the Christ of the Creator. Joshua a Type of Him. "He [God] called him [the pillar of smoke, which was Christ] an angel indeed, because of the greatness of the powers which he was to exercise, and because of his prophetic office, while announcing the will of God; but Joshua also (Jesus), because it was a type of His own future name."]

ANF 4, 106-107: Tertullian, On Fasting, 7: [106] ... Look at Daniel’s example. About the dream of the King of Babylon all the sophists are troubled: they affirm that, without external aid, it cannot be discovered by human skill. Daniel alone, trusting to God, and knowing what would tend to the deserving of God’s favour, requires a space of three days, fasts with his fraternity, and — his prayers thus commended — is instructed throughout as to the order and signification of the dream; quarter is granted to the tyrant’s sophists; God is glorified; Daniel is honoured; destined as he was to receive, even subsequently also, no less a favour of God in the first year, of King Darius, when, after careful [107] and repeated meditation upon the times predicted by Jeremiah, he set his face to God in fasts, and sackcloth, and ashes. For the angel, withal, sent to him, immediately professed this to be the cause of the Divine approbation: “I am come,” he said, “to demonstrate to thee, since thou art pitiable”1 —by fasting, to wit. If to God he was “pitiable,” to the lions in the den he was formidable, where, six days fasting, he had breakfast provided him by an angel.2

1) Dan. 9.23; 10.11.
2) See Bel and the Dragon (in LXX.) vers. 31-39. “Pitiable” appears to be Tertullian’s rendering of what in the E.V. is rendered “greatly beloved.” Rig. (in Oehler) renders: “of how great compassion thou hast attained the favour;” but surely that overlooks the fact that the Latin is “miserabilis es,” not “sis.”

ANF 4, 353: Origen, First Principals, 4.1: ... The weeks of years, also, which the prophet Daniel had predicted, extending to the leadership of Christ,2 have been ful­filled.

2) Cf. Dan. 9.25. Ad ducem Christum; “To Messiah the Prince,” Auth. Vers.

ANF 4, 594-595: Origen, Against Celsus, 6.46: [594] ... What is stated by Paul in the words quoted from him, where he says, “so that he sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God,”8 is in Daniel referred to in the following fashion: “And on the temple shall be [595] the abomination of desolations, and at the end of the time an end shall be put to the desolation.”1 So many, out of a greater number of passages, have I thought it right to adduce, that the hearer may understand in some slight degree the meaning of holy Scripture, when it gives us information concerning the devil and Antichrist; and being satisfied with what we have quoted for this purpose, let us look at another of the charges of Celsus, and reply to it as we best may.

594n8) Cf. 2 Thess. 2.4
595n1) Cf. Dan. 9.27 (LXX.).

ANF 5, 212-213: Hippolytus, Treatise on Christ and Antichrist, 43: [212] ... With respect, then, to the particular judgment in the torments that are to come upon it in the last times by the hand of the tyrants who shall arise then, the clearest statement has been given in these passages. But it becomes us further diligently to examine and set forth the period at which these things shall come to pass, and how the little horn shall spring up in their midst. For [213] when the legs of iron have issued in the feet and toes, according to the similitude of the image and that of the terrible beast, as has been shown in the above, (then shall be the time) when the iron and the clay shall be mingled together. Now Daniel will set forth this subject to us. For he says, “And one week will make1 a covenant with many, and it shall be that in the midst (half) of the week my sacrifice and oblation shall cease.”2 By one week, therefore, he meant the last week which is to be at the end of the whole world of which week the two prophets Enoch and Elias will take up the half. For they will preach 1,260 days clothed in sackcloth, proclaiming repentance to the people and to all the nations.

213n1) διαθήσει = will make; others, δυναμώσει = will confirm.
213n2) Dan. 9.27.

ANF 5, 247: Hippolytus, Appendix (Likely Spurious), Discourse on the End of the World, 21:

For through the Scriptures we are instructed in two advents of the Christ and Saviour. And the first after the flesh was in humiliation, because He was manifested in lowly estate. So then His second advent is declared to be in glory; for He comes from heaven with power, and angels, and the glory of His Father. His first advent had John the Baptist as its forerunner; and His second, in which He is to come in glory, will exhibit Enoch, and Elias, and John the Divine.1 Behold, too, the Lord’s kindness to man; how even in the last times He shows His care for mortals, and pities them. For He will not leave us even then without prophets, but will send them to us for our instruction and assurance, and to make us give heed to the advent of the adversary, as He intimated also of old in this Daniel. For he says, “I shall make a covenant of one week, and in the midst of the week my sacrifice and libation will be removed.” For by one week he indicates the showing forth of the seven years which shall be in the last times.2

1) Or, the theologian. The Apocalypse (xi. 3) mentions only two witnesses, who are understood by the ancients in general as Enoch and Elias. The author of the Chronicon Paschale, p. 21, on Enoch, says: “This is he who, along with Elias, is to withstand Antichrist in the last days, and to confute his deceit, according to the tradition of the Church.” This addition as to the return of John the Evangelist is somewhat more uncommon. And yet Ephraem of Antioch, in Photius, cod. ccxxix {229}., states that this too is supported by ancient, ecclesiastical tradition, Christ’s saying in John 21.22 being understood to that effect. See also Hippolytus, De Antichristo, ch. l. p. 213, supra. — Migne. [Enoch and Elias are not dead. But see Heb. 9.27.]
2) Dan. 9.27. ( Note our author’s adoption of the plan of a year for a day, Ezek. 4.6. See Pusey, Daniel, p. 165.]

ANF 5, 248: Hippolytus, Appendix (of likely Spurious works), Discourse on the End of the World, 25:
And at first, indeed, that deceitful and lawless one, with crafty deceitfulness, will refuse such glory; but the men persisting, and holding by him, will declare him king. And thereafter he will be lifted up in heart, and he who was formerly gentle will become violent, and he who pursued love will become pitiless, and the humble in heart will become haughty and inhuman, and the hater of unrighteousness will persecute the righteous. Then, when he is elevated to his kingdom, he will marshal war; and in his wrath he will smite three mighty kings, — those, namely, of Egypt, Libya, and Ethiopia. And after that he will build the temple in Jerusalem, and will restore it again speedily, and give it over to the Jews. And then he will be lifted up in heart against every man; yea, he will speak blasphemy also against God, thinking in his deceit that he shall be king upon the earth hereafter for ever; not knowing, miserable wretch, that his kingdom is to be quickly brought to nought, and that he will quickly have to meet the fire which is prepared for him, along with all who trust him and serve him. For when Daniel said, “I shall make my covenant for one week,”9 he indicated seven years; and the one half of the week is for the preaching of the prophets, and for the other half of the week—that is to say, for three years and a half — Antichrist will reign upon the earth. And after this his kingdom and his glory shall be taken away.

9) Dan. 9.27. [The ἀνομία which more and more prevails in our age in all nations, makes all this very significant to us, of “the last days.”]

ANF 6, 375: Methodius, Discourse on the Resurrection, 12: The transformation, he says, is the restoration into an impassible and glorious state. For now the body is a body of desire and of humiliation,7 and therefore Daniel was called “a man of desires.”8 But then it will be transfigured into an impassible body, not by the change of the arrangement of the members, but by its not desiring carnal pleasures.

7) Phil. 3.21.
8) Dan. 9.23, marginal reading.

ANF 7, 357: Victorinus, Commentary on the Apocalypse of the Blessed John, ch 13: Thence here he places, and by and by here he renews, that of which the Lord, admonishing His churches concerning the last times and their dangers, says: "But when ye shall see the contempt which is spoken of by Daniel the prophet standing in the holy place, let him who readeth understand."2 It is called a contempt when God is provoked, because idols are worshipped instead of God, or when the dogma of heretics is introduced in the churches. But it is a turning away because stedfast men, seduced by false signs and portents, are turned away from their salvation.

2) Matt. 24.15; Dan. 9.27.

ANF 8, 94: Anonymous, The Recognitions of Clement, 64: Temple to Be Destroyed.

“‘For we,’ said I, ‘have ascertained beyond doubt that God is much rather displeased with the sacrifices which you offer, the time of sacrifices having now passed away; and because ye will not acknowledge that the time for offering victims is now past, therefore the temple shall be destroyed, and the abomination of desolation1 shall stand in the holy place; and then the Gospel shall be preached to the Gentiles for a testimony against you, that your unbelief may be judged by their faith. For the whole world at different times suffers under divers maladies, either spreading generally over all, or affecting specially. Therefore it needs a physician to visit it for its salvation. We therefore bear witness to you, and declare to you what has been hidden from every one of you. It is for you to consider what is for your advantage.’”

1) Dan. 9.27; Matt. 24.15.

Respectfully,

Mr Scowling Waggyfinger

[Kris]

Neil,

Can you then tell me what your thoughts are as to how Jesus shows up
In the 30'ad then? Do you think he was a real man? Or a myth? If a real man, is it simply coincidental that he dies basically around the same time as Christians try to interpret Daniel, also in the 30s ad? Is it just coincidence? I don't think they are using the right starting point, but it is a curious thing. I am just trying to understand your thoughts on this!!

[neilgodfrey]

Neil,

Can you then tell me what your thoughts are as to how Jesus shows up
In the 30'ad then? Do you think he was a real man? Or a myth? If a real man, is it simply coincidental that he dies basically around the same time as Christians try to interpret Daniel, also in the 30s ad? Is it just coincidence? I don't think they are using the right starting point, but it is a curious thing. I am just trying to understand your thoughts on this!!

Kris -- our canonical gospel narrative is not the way it has always been. There was another view that Jesus died in the time of Claudius. I sometimes wonder if Clement of Alexandria suggests that Jesus died in Nero's time, just prior to the Jewish war.

I don't believe that there was any concept of a biographical narrative about Jesus -- any idea of a Jesus who had lived as a human for some years on earth -- until after 70. Only after the fall of Jerusalem (maybe even after 117, or even conceivably 13os??) did that concept emerge. This new Jesus idea was in some ways a personification of Israel, at least the "new Israel", a representative figure of the "new man" or new community that took a life of its own apart from Judaism within a few years of the fall.

A setting had to be found for this new figure. Mark placed him at the head of the generation that would survive to see the fall of Jerusalem. A bit vague but the general idea of a generation was the theological point.

If later Fathers tried to narrow down that time -- meanwhile jettisoning other suggestions (e.g. the time of Claudius for his death) -- to make it fit with Daniel, then I'm sure they had a lot of fun making it all fit. Maybe some of them tried to be more precise to the actual crucifixion date to make it fit with how they thought they might interpret Daniel more exactly. (It's a while since I checked but I'd be interested to know how other Jews in the Second Temple interpreted any of those times in Daniel.)

[andrewcriddle]

Neil,

Can you then tell me what your thoughts are as to how Jesus shows up
In the 30'ad then? Do you think he was a real man? Or a myth? If a real man, is it simply coincidental that he dies basically around the same time as Christians try to interpret Daniel, also in the 30s ad? Is it just coincidence? I don't think they are using the right starting point, but it is a curious thing. I am just trying to understand your thoughts on this!!

Kris -- our canonical gospel narrative is not the way it has always been. There was another view that Jesus died in the time of Claudius. I sometimes wonder if Clement of Alexandria suggests that Jesus died in Nero's time, just prior to the Jewish war.

Clement of Alexandria Stromateis Book 1 chapter 21

And our Lord was born in the twenty-eighth year, when first the census was ordered to be taken in the reign of Augustus. And to prove that this is true, it is written in the Gospel by Luke as follows: And in the fifteenth year, in the reign of Tiberius Cæsar, the word of the Lord came to John, the son of Zacharias. And again in the same book: And Jesus was coming to His baptism, being about thirty years old, and so on. And that it was necessary for Him to preach only a year, this also is written: He has sent Me to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord . This both the prophet spoke, and the Gospel. Accordingly, in fifteen years of Tiberius and fifteen years of Augustus; so were completed the thirty years till the time He suffered. And from the time that He suffered till the destruction of Jerusalem are forty-two years and three months; and from the destruction of Jerusalem to the death of Commodus, a hundred and twenty-eight years, ten months, and three days. From the birth of Christ, therefore, to the death of Commodus are, in all, a hundred and ninety-four years, one month, thirteen days. And there are those who have determined not only the year of our Lord's birth, but also the day; and they say that it took place in the twenty-eighth year of Augustus, and in the twenty-fifth day of Pachon. And the followers of Basilides hold the day of his baptism as a festival, spending the night before in readings.

And they say that it was the fifteenth year of Tiberius Cæsar, the fifteenth day of the month Tubi; and some that it was the eleventh of the same month. And treating of His passion, with very great accuracy, some say that it took place in the sixteenth year of Tiberius, on the twenty-fifth of Phamenoth; and others the twenty-fifth of Pharmuthi and others say that on the nineteenth of Pharmuthi the Saviour suffered. Further, others say that He was born on the twenty-fourth or twenty-fifth of Pharmuthi.

This clearly dates the death of Jesus in the time of Tiberius.

Andrew Criddle

[neilgodfrey]

Clement of Alexandria Stromateis Book 1 chapter 21

And our Lord was born in the twenty-eighth year, when first the census was ordered to be taken in the reign of Augustus. And to prove that this is true, it is written in the Gospel by Luke as follows: And in the fifteenth year, in the reign of Tiberius Cæsar, the word of the Lord came to John, the son of Zacharias. And again in the same book: And Jesus was coming to His baptism, being about thirty years old, and so on. And that it was necessary for Him to preach only a year, this also is written: He has sent Me to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord . This both the prophet spoke, and the Gospel. Accordingly, in fifteen years of Tiberius and fifteen years of Augustus; so were completed the thirty years till the time He suffered. And from the time that He suffered till the destruction of Jerusalem are forty-two years and three months; and from the destruction of Jerusalem to the death of Commodus, a hundred and twenty-eight years, ten months, and three days. From the birth of Christ, therefore, to the death of Commodus are, in all, a hundred and ninety-four years, one month, thirteen days. And there are those who have determined not only the year of our Lord's birth, but also the day; and they say that it took place in the twenty-eighth year of Augustus, and in the twenty-fifth day of Pachon. And the followers of Basilides hold the day of his baptism as a festival, spending the night before in readings.

And they say that it was the fifteenth year of Tiberius Cæsar, the fifteenth day of the month Tubi; and some that it was the eleventh of the same month. And treating of His passion, with very great accuracy, some say that it took place in the sixteenth year of Tiberius, on the twenty-fifth of Phamenoth; and others the twenty-fifth of Pharmuthi and others say that on the nineteenth of Pharmuthi the Saviour suffered. Further, others say that He was born on the twenty-fourth or twenty-fifth of Pharmuthi.

This clearly dates the death of Jesus in the time of Tiberius.

Andrew Criddle

It certainly does. Thanks for the reminder.

The passage I had in mind was the following, a few paragraphs above:

From the captivity at Babylon, which took place in the time of Jeremiah the prophet, was fulfilled what was spoken by Daniel the prophet as follows: “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to seal sins, and to wipe out and make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal the vision and the prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies. Know therefore, and understand, that from the going forth of the word commanding an answer to be given, and Jerusalem to be built, to Christ the Prince, are seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; and the street shall be again built, and the wall; and the times shall be expended. And after the sixty-two weeks the anointing shall be overthrown, and judgment shall not be in him; and he shall destroy the city and the sanctuary along with the coming Prince. And they shall be destroyed in a flood, and to the end of the war shall be cut off by desolations. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; and in the middle of the week the sacrifice and oblation shall be taken away; and in the holy place shall be the abomination of desolations, and until the consummation of time shall the consummation be assigned for desolation. And in the midst of the week shall he make the incense of sacrifice cease, and of the wing of destruction, even till the consummation, like the destruction of the oblation.” That the temple accordingly was built in seven weeks, is evident; for it is written in Esdras. And thus Christ became King of the Jews, reigning in Jerusalem in the fulfilment of the seven weeks. And in the sixty and two weeks the whole of Judæa was quiet, and without wars. And Christ our Lord, “the Holy of Holies,” having come and fulfilled the vision and the prophecy, was anointed in His flesh by the Holy Spirit of His Father. In those “sixty and two weeks,” as the prophet said, and “in the one week,” was He Lord. The half of the week Nero held sway, and in the holy city Jerusalem placed the abomination; and in the half of the week he was taken away, and Otho, and Galba, and Vitellius. And Vespasian rose to the supreme power, and destroyed Jerusalem, and desolated the holy place. And that such are the facts of the case, is clear to him that is able to understand, as the prophet said.

Whatever that was meaning to say.