Another Daniel Issue-- please help!

[Kris]

I sure hope you can help me. One thing that I seemed to find solace in was that Daniel appeared to be written about the Maccabeean times, and that it really did not apply to our day, or even to Jesus. However, today, I ran across something that I had not heard of before, that kind of gave me pause. In the past, whenever the discussion around the Christian interpretation of Daniel came up, the example provided usually had the starting date at 444bc—using the decree that Artaxerxes issued and then there is a series of “prophetic” years that have 360 days in them. I had always found this interpretation to be lacking and seemed to be force-fitting dates, etc. So, I easily was able to debunk that version. However, I ran across a new version that the Christians have that I don’t have such easy answers for . In this version, the decree to build starts in 458bc, based on Ezra 7:7, and then runs for 483 years to 26ad using regular calendar days. According to this version, Jesus is the messiah in question and halfway through he is cut off—at around 30ad. Some have this cut-off occurring in 33ad as well—but basically the week ends. Then the temple is destroyed sometime later. I have seen Yoma 39b from the Talmud referenced as additional evidence to this date.

Anyway, I am having trouble debunking this one so easily. I honestly feel that the Antiochus interpretation is the correct one and that overall, the prophecy failed because the end didn’t come back then, but I also know that some of the dates for it are not really all that concise. However, this Christina interpretation seems pretty straight forward dating wise and fits right to the time that Jesus supposedly lived and died. How might this one be debunked for the interpretation of 165bc? I might posit that either those developing the Jesus story placed his crucifixion around this time because of possible interpretations in Daniel, and folks in the first century not wanting the prophecy to just be wrong—or perhaps Jesus planned his death around this time, so as to appear to be the messiah—since it is clear that he was aware of the scriptures of Daniel since he mentioned them. Is this possible? I don’t want to fear the end times any more—and Daniel was always a big part of the end times preaching. I tried to look up sites that debunked this particular interpretation, but had trouble finding anything. Any help you can provide would be greatly appreciated. I have attached a christian interpetation for your reference so you can see what they are asserting. I really want to debunk this and not worry about it!!

[spin]

Moving the goal posts is a way of scoring points. However, Daniel is dealing with the 70 year prophecy of Jeremiah, the prophet specifically referenced in Ezra 1:1 where the order of Cyrus is introduced. You can read it in the following verses, the result of which is the party led by Zerubbabel heading off to Palestine.

The biggest con though is in the manipulation of Dan 9:25. Two sentences are joined together in the verse, one ending with "seven weeks" (from the order to the arrival of the anointed prince) and the other starting with sixty-two weeks, the duration of the survival of the reconstructed city. Christians add the two together so as to transport the anointed prince to the end of that time period, ie the end of 69 weeks, thus totally changing the significance of the verse to get a christian outcome when coupled with the redated start of the seventy weeks.

[srd44]

Add to that:

The messiah referred to in 9:26 was an historical personage --- it is Onias III. Apparently he was "cut down", that is murdered because his brother bribed Antiochus for the priesthood. Jason was a Hellenizer, i.e., wished to bring Greek ways into Jerusalem, whereas Onias the III was still supported by the Hasidic party and seen as the last anointed priest of the Zadokite line.

Also, the Hebrew messiah became a standard term in the post-exilic period, Persian period, and Hellenistic period to denote the highpriest, usually an Aaronid or Zadokite priest. The book of Leviticus often speaks of the Aaronid high priest as "Yahweh's anointed." The Hasidic party, to which the book of Daniel has ties, largely viewed Onias as Yahweh's appointed, i.e., messia. I believe the last priestly messiah.

The Qumran sectarians also fudged around with Daniel's prophecy to mesh with their messianic expectations, but I forget the details.

The only "prophetic" element in the book of Daniel, similarly Revelation, is the hoped for imminent event that our author most likely believed would immediately happen: Yahweh's judgement on Antiochus persecution---martyrdom was seen as appeasing Yahweh's wrath (understood theologically as the persecution itself: Daniel's refrain of How long?)---and then the establishment of a theocratic state, i.e., God's kingdom. It appears that our author/editors variously saw this date as 1,150 days from, then 1,290 days from, Dec. 8, 167 BC (v. 14), when the temple was cleansed.

This hoped for event never happens, messianic fervor still continues to reign high since now Judea has come under Roman control, and communities and readers unfamiliar with the book of Daniel's historical context (the persecutions under Antiochus), now interpret the hoped for imminent event that never happened as an open-ended prophecy. This is merely what I call abusive, negligent, and ignorant attitudes toward these ancient texts. Readers such as these are more concerned, only concerned, with their own beliefs, and care nor know little to nothing about the beliefs of the author of this text and its historical setting.

[Kris]

I forgot to add the link:

http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/lds ... ewton.html

[spin]

I forgot to add the link:

You should have continued to forget. Newton had no access to meaningful information on the text.

[ficino]

I think Newton was looking around in history to try to get ten nations, and of course there's a way to interpret things so as to produce ten - esp. if details like even the ones in the article are fudged.

I remember in the 1970s, the ten were interpreted by Hal Lindsay as the Common Market. There was a lot of excitement in prophecy circles about the moment when the Common Market would number ten nations. Later it morphed into the EU - how many nations now?

[Kris]

Oops wrong link. This is the one I meant to post:

http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/lds ... aniel.html

[spin]

Oops wrong link. This is the one I meant to post:

http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/lds ... aniel.html

Does it make any difference? If you really must interact with this nonsense, I suggest you get a scholarly commentary on the subject. I've dealt with christian fundamerntalist dummies too often to know that it doesn't matter how much evidence you shove down their throats and how much you correct the ignorance, they will bounce back like a baby's toy.

Did you spend a minute contemplating the weird conflation in Dan 9:25 that allows the two time periods to be added together?

There are three people in Dan 9:25-27, 1) an anointed prince who comes after 7 weeks (Yeshua son of Yehozadak, after the death of Zerubbabel), 2) an anointed one 9:26a (Onias III), and 3) the prince who is to come (Antiochus IV), who makes temple sacrifice cease (see also 10:31b which deals with the same event, as does 8:11b).

[Kris]

Thanks for your comments Spin. I will look up the verses you mentioned. I don't WANT in keep worrying about this crap and that is why I am trying to resolve it in my mind. I don't want to subscribe to the christisn interpretation of Daniel-- but this version was new and hadn't been picked apart as much as the other lame versions that they have. Lone hint I am looking at is the timing of the a jointed one being cut off. Seems like this happens right after the 62 weeks. By the interpretation in the link I posted, this would be around 26ad? I know the Christians try to put this either at the middle of the seventieth week (30ad) or at the end (33ad)
What are your thoughts on that?

[spin]

You don't seem to understand my last post. Let me try to make it simple. There are seventy weeks of years. After the first seven, the anointed prince appears (Dan 9:25). 62 weeks later the anointed one is cut off. The anointed prince and the anointed one are two separate people separated by hundreds of years.

• 7 weeks -> anointed prince - 62 weeks -> anointed one & prince - ½ week -> sacrifice stopped

If you got my first post in the thread, you'd know that starting counting from the date supplied in Ezra 7 is utterly dishonest. We know that Cyrus took Babylon in 539, which was the year of his decree that allowed the Babylonian Jews to go Jerusalem and reclaim it. It is therefore from there that one must count, if one must count at all.

The only reason to shift the goal posts from Cyrus's proclamation (Ezra 1) to Ezra 7:7, when Ezra is said to have set off, is to try to make the prophecy fit Jesus. The date 458 requires that the king at the time was Artaxerxes I (reigned 465-424). However, reading Ezra you'll see that there are two kings Artaxerxes: the first (4:7-23) was preceded by Xerxes I = Ahasuerus, and the second (7:1-) was preceded by Darius II. See 6:13 for the building by the Jews through the reigns of Cyrus, Darius (I) and Artaxerxes (I) and finishing in the 6th year of Darius II. The passover is celebrated in 6:19-22. Then Artaxerxes II became ruler in 7:1. He was king from 404-359.

If you start the 490 year count from 7:7 then you start from the 7th year of Artaxerxes II, ie 397. 490 years after that is 97 CE. So trying to fit Jesus in is shit whichever way you look at it.