Daniel 9:24 - 27 and Antiochus Epiphanes

[Stephan Huller]

The sanctuary of Jerusalem is looked upon as defiled (amf). According to one of the classical explanations of the origin of the Essenes and the Qumran community ('the Maccabean theory'), the view that the temple is defiled is somehow connected to a conflict caused by the Maccabean war (Vermes xvi, xxix).

http://books.google.com/books?id=c9hug6 ... on&f=false

[Stephan Huller]

Tertullian's odd reading of Daniel 9:24 - 27. Daniel 9:26 actually reads:

After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood. And till the end of the war desolations are determined.

One might expect that Tertullian would identify Jesus with 'the Anointed' (i.e the Christ) but he does not surprisingly. Instead he is 'the Leader' a figure normally identified as an evil man. His reading of Daniel 9:26 is positively strange:

"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."

et civitatem sanctam et sanctum exterminari cum duce venturo et destrui pinnaculum usque ad interitum

Compare Vulgate:

Et civitatem et sanctuarium dissipabit populus cum duce venturo: et finis ejus vastitas, et post finem belli statuta desolatio.

And Tertullian's commentary:

And so the times of the coming Christ, the Leader ... and how, after the passion of the Christ, that city had to be exterminated

[Stephan Huller]

Actually I see a little later that Tertullian cites from his text but it only makes things more confusing. For Tertullian seems to follow Aquila's translation where מָשִׁיחַ is rendered not 'anointed one' but 'anointing' - i.e. the oil used to anoint the priests is no more:

"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. [5] And I am come to announce to thee, because thou art a man of desires;103 and ponder thou on the word, and understand in the vision. Seventy hebdomads have been abridged104 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, and105 ) lxii and an half: and it shall convert, and shall be built into height and entrenchment, and the times shall be renewed: [6] and after these lxii 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, (and106 ) until the end of (the) time consummation shall be given with regard to this devastation."

In primo anno sub Dario filio Assueri a semine Medorum qui regnavit super regnum Chaldaeorum ego Daniel intellexi in libris numerum annorum. Et adhuc me loquente in oratione ecce vir Gabriel quem vidi in visione in principio volans et tetigit me quasi hora sacrificii vespertini et intellegere fecit me et locutus est mecum et dixit: Daniel, nunc exivi imbuere te intellegentia, in principio obsecrationis tuae exivit sermo. [5] Et ego veni ut adnuntiem tibi, quia vir desideriorum tu es, et cogita in verbo et intellege in visione: septuaginta ebdomades breviatae sunt super plebem tuam et super civitatem sanctam, quoadusque inveteretur delictum et signentur peccata et exorentur iniustitiae et inducatur iustitia aeterna et [ut] signetur visio et prophetes et unguatur sanctus sanctorum. Et scies et percipies et intelleges: a profectione sermonis in integrando et aedificando Hierusalem usque ad Christum ducem ebdomades <septem et dimidia et ebdomades> sexaginta et duae et dimidia; et convertet et aedificabitur in latitudinem et convallationem et innovabuntur tempora. [6] Et post ebdomadas has sexaginta et duas <et dimidiam> exterminabitur unctio et non erit, et civitatem et sanctum exterminabit cum duce adveniente, et concidentur quomodo in cataclysmo usque in finem belli quod concidetur usque ad interitum. Et confirmabit testamentum in multis; ebdomada una et dimidia ebdomadis auferetur meum sacrificium et libatio, et in sancto exsecratio vastationis, et usque ad finem temporis consummatio dabitur super hanc vastationem

The idea that a Christian would not identify Jesus as 'the anointed one' is certainly Marcionite. I can't see what other group would deny any association between Jesus and one of the only explicit references to the concept of 'messiah.' Interesting. Apparently Origen agrees http://books.google.com/books?id=J-xeOS ... la&f=false

[Stephan Huller]

Actually I am looking further on and that strange version of Daniel 9:26 is cited again verbatim so it is an actual variant reading which differs from the lengthy citation of chapter 9 cited just after. Fascinating! Clearly then the text is corrupt and a second hand has layered a 'correct' reading of Daniel on top of an original version of Against the Jews (probably written in Greek) which Tertullian used and corrected or perhaps someone even before Tertullian! Here is the variant text of Daniel 9:26 appearing for a second time:

Observe we, therefore, the limit,--how, in truth, he predicts that there are to be lxx hebdomads, within which if they receive Him, "it shall be built into height and entrenchment, and the times shall be renewed." [8] 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 and ii and an half of an hebdomad He is born, and an holy one of holy ones is anointed; but that when vii hebdomads 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."109 [9] Whence, therefore, do we show that the Christ came within the lxii and an half hebdomads?

The math here is hopeless incomprehensible. At the core is clearly the idea that the seventy weeks (490 years) end with the destruction of the temple. Tertullian argues that God will manifest himself within the 70 weeks and test the Jews and if they fail (indeed he knows they will fail) he will destroy the temple. But there are so many contradictory ideas here including:

1. 7.5 sevens or (52.5) years before 70 CE = 17.5 CE Jesus was born (= "that in lx and ii and an half of an hebdomad He is born, and an holy one of holy ones is anointed")
2. Jesus suffered his Passion (= "when vii hebdomads and an half were fulfilling, He had to suffer") but more specifically 59.5 CE (= the holy city had to be exterminated after one and an half hebdomad)

Something's not quite right here.

[Stephan Huller]

Indeed the hand of the second editor comes in and attempts to correct something else more original as we read in what follows again:

Accordingly, showing, both the number of the years, and the time of the lx two and an half fulfilled hebdomads, on completion of which, (we have shown) that Christ is come, that is, has been born, let us see what (mean) other "vii and an half hebdomads," which have been subdivided in the abscision of the former hebdomads; (let us see, namely, ) in what event they have been fulfilled:--

[16] For, after Augustus who survived after the birth of Christ, are made up xv years (15).
To whom succeeded Tiberius Caesar, and held the empire xx years, vii months, xxviii days (20 etc.).
(In the fiftieth year of his empire Christ suffered. being about xxx years of age when he suffered.)
Again Caius Caesar, also called Caligula iii years, viii months, xiii days (3 etc.).
Nero Caesar xi years, ix months, xiii days (11 etc.).
Galba vii months, vi days. (7 etc.).
Otho iii days.
Vitellius viii mos., xxvii days (8 mos.).

This calculation completely contradicts the one we just saw.

[Stephan Huller]

I think I am beginning to make headway here. Jerome apparently describes Tertullian's (lost) original understanding - something that only emerges in fragments in our 'corrected' text of Against the Jews. It can be compared with the system of Clement and Hippolytus.

From Jerome's account of these authors' interpretations of the 70 weeks foretold by Daniel, we come to realize that the majority of them at one point or another included the advent of Christ in their chronologies. For example, we have those who point to a date close to the end of the 69th week (e.g., Eusebius and Hippolytus), others to the end of the 70th week (e.g., Africanus, Apollinarius, and the Hebrews), and even what appears to be a confused opinion by Tertullian regarding the order of the weeks for the date of Christ's advent. In fact, regarding the latter, Jerome recalls the attempt to explain how Christ would arrive at the end of the 62nd week. Chronology is the main resource used, and it appears that Tertullian considered the first year of Darius to be the starting point for his own scheme. In fact, he takes that date as if it were when Daniel received his vision. Then, he introduces a complete chronology covering the period from that date until Christ's birth, and he arrives at a total of 437 years and 5 months, which represents an irrelevant difference regarding the common interpretation of the 70 weeks of about 53 years. Therefore, Tertullian's chronology would still leave space for the three and a half years described as the last half of the 70th week, i.e., when Christ was born. Christ's advent was a representation “that the vision was confirmed by a seal; and it was called a prophecy because Christ Himself is the seal of all the prophets, fulfilling as He did all that the prophets had previously declared concerning Him. In this way, we can assume that Tertullian is also identifying Christ with the anointed prince mentioned in Daniel who was supposed to inaugurate the beginning of the end. However, Tertullian is not clear about whether he is considering here Christ's birth or his death, which in a certain way is a secondary question. Moreover, according to Jerome, Tertullian somehow inverted the order of the weeks, and we read that seven weeks will follow to that larger period of time, i.e., to the 62 weeks previously described in Daniel as the second period.

Within the events of this period of the seven weeks, Tertullian includes the Roman domination until the conquest of the Jews by Vespasian. At that time, he considers that “the Jews had completed the seventy weeks foretold by Daniel. When we analyse this interpretation, we observe how Tertullian uses chronology in order to fulfill his own interpretation of Daniel. Therefore, we have this larger period that comprises 70 weeks that goes from Darius until the birth of Christ to which follows yet another seven weeks during which Rome would exercise its power over the Jews until the final destruction was reached. Only at that moment could Daniel's prophecy be completely fulfilled, according to Tertullian. [Maria Ana T. Valdez Historical Interpretations of the “Fifth Empire”: Brill p. 169 f]

[Stephan Huller]

In other words if we invert the order for a second (i.e. going backwards from 70 CE):

70 CE - 21 CE = 7 Hebdomads
Before that 62 Hebdomads

or if you prefer:

Darius to the crucifixion of Jesus 62 x 7 = 444 years (21 CE)
Passion to destruction of Temple = 49 years (70 CE)
1 week thereafter = completion of the Seventy Weeks (77 CE)

The point I think the reader can finally see is that the original system at the core of Against the Jews assumes 21 CE as a significant date. We already know that this was the date assigned for the crucifixion by the official document of the Roman Empire. Valdez and others note that Tertullian identifies this date both in terms of 'the birth of Jesus' and 'the Passion' but we can immediately see that a second author 'corrected' the original interest in 21 CE as the date of the crucifixion. Pretty impressive no?

[MrMacSon]

^ are you saying they did prophecy as history ie. worked the [pseudo-historical] narrative to fit prophecy?

[Stephan Huller]

Interestingly this reconstruction of 'the first year of Darius' corresponding to 423 CE (= 444 BCE - 21 CE) incredibly exactly corresponds to the dates of Darius II.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_kings_of_Persia

In other words, could this have actually been the original (second reworking) of the Seventy Weeks prophesy i.e. to substitute Darius II for Darius?

[Stephan Huller]

Thanks to the tireless efforts of the great Roger Pearse we have ready access to Jerome's original Commentary on Daniel in English. Here is the relevant section:

We may learn what Tertullian had to say on the subject by consulting the book which he wrote against the Jews (Contra Judaeos), and his remarks may be set forth in brief: "How, then, are we to show that Christ came within the sixty-two (A) weeks? This calculation begins with the first year of Darius, since that was the time when the vision itself was revealed to Daniel. For he was told: 'Understand and conclude from (B) the prophesying (692) of the command for me to give thee this reply. ...' Hence we are to commence our computation with the first year of Darius, when Daniel beheld this vision. Let us see, then, how the years are fulfilled up to the advent of Christ. Darius reigned nineteen (p. 550) years; Artaxerxes forty years; the Ochus who was surnamed Cyrus twenty-four years; (C) Argus, one year. Then Darius II, who was called Melas, twenty-one (D) years. Alexander the Macedonian reigned twelve years. And then after Alexander (who had ruled over both the Medes and the Persians, after he had conquered them, and had established his rule in Alexandria, calling it after his own name), Soter reigned (E) there in Alexandria for thirty-five years, and was succeeded by Philadelphus, who reigned for thirty-eight years (F). After him Euergetes reigned for twenty-five years, and then Philopator for seventeen years, followed by Epiphanes for twenty-four years. Furthermore the second Euergetes ruled for twenty (G) and nine years, and Soter for thirty-eight years. Ptolemy [sic!] for thirty-seven (H) years, and Cleopatra for twenty years and five months (I). Furthermore Cleopatra shared the rule with Augustus for thirteen years. After Cleopatra Augustus reigned forty-three years more. For all of the years of the reign of Augustus were fifty-six in number. And let us see (variant: we see) that in the forty-first year of the reign of Augustus, who ruled after the death of Cleopatra (J), (693) Christ was born. And this same Augustus lived on for fifteen years after the time when Christ was born. And so the resultant periods of years up to the day of Christ's birth and the forty-first year of Augustus, after the death of Cleopatra [actually only twenty-nine |107 years after Cleopatra's death ---- the language here is confusing], come to the total figure of four hundred and thirty-seven years and five months. This means that sixty-two and a half weeks were used up, or the equivalent of four hundred and thirty-seven years and six months, by the day when Christ was born. Then eternal righteousness was revealed, and the Saint of saints was anointed, namely Christ, and the vision and prophecy were sealed, and those sins were remitted which are allowed through faith in Christ's name to all who believe in Him." But what is the meaning of the statement that the "vision and prophecy are confirmed by a seal"? It means that all the prophets made proclamation concerning [Christ] Himself, saying that He was going to come and that He would have to suffer. Hence we read shortly thereafter in this Tertullian passage, "The years were fifty-six in number; furthermore, Cleopatra continued to reign jointly under Augustus...." (p. 551) It was because the prophecy was fulfilled by His advent that the vision was confirmed by a seal; and it was called a prophecy because Christ Himself is the seal of all the prophets, fulfilling as He did all that the prophets had previously declared concerning Him. Of course after His advent and His passion (variant; the passion of Christ), there is no longer any vision or prophecy (variant: or prophet) which declares that Christ will come [?]. And then a little later Tertullian says, "Let us see what is the meaning of (A) the seven and a half weeks, which in turn are divided up into a subsection of earlier weeks; by what transaction were they fulfilled? Well, after Augustus, (B) who lived on after Christ's birth, fifteen years elapsed. He was succeeded by Tiberius Caesar, and he held sway for twenty-two years, seven months and twenty-eight (C) days. In the fifteenth year of his reign (D) Christ suffered, being about (694) thirty-three when He suffered. Then there was Gaius Caesar, also named Caligula, who reigned for three years, eight months and thirteen days. [Note that Claudius' reign of 13 years is here omitted.] Nero reigned for nine years, nine months and thirteen days. Galba ruled for seven months and twenty-eight (E) days; Otho for three months and five days; and Vitellius for eight months and twenty-eight (F) days. Vespasian vanquished the Jews in the first year of his reign, bringing the number of years to a total of fifty-two, plus six months. For he ruled for eleven years, and so by the date of his |108 storming Jerusalem, the Jews had completed the seventy weeks foretold by Daniel."