Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Kris wrote: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?

The 70 weeks of years in Daniel ch.9 are a prophetic template. A prophetic time template in which interpretations of history could be placed. i.e. history viewed as salvation history; history with a meaning or significance for some people. And, naturally, as history moves along - so too does applications of the prophetic template. Prophecy, prophetic interpretations of Jewish history, does not stop at such and such a date or historical event. It was a national past-time! In other words; the 70 weeks of Daniel ch.9 are open ended. Whether it's the 7 years, the 49 years, the 70 years, the 483 years, the 434 years or the 490 years. The number used deemed to be appropriate for the salvation history that is derived from historical events.

An example:


[my bolding)

That historical event took place in 37 b.c.e.

Most probably, to tie in the events of 37 b.c.e. to Daniel's 70 years prophetic template, the writers of the above used the 483 years from the start of the temple rebuilding project around 521 b.c.e. (Ezra 5). The return to Jerusalem from Babylon in 537 b.c. being 49 years from that temple's destruction. Interestingly, of course, is the execution of the last King of the Jews in that year. (Antigonus being hung on a cross and scourged prior to being beheaded - Cassius Dio for the crucifixion and Josephus for the beheading).

The above is Hasmonean/Jewish history.

The gospel writers made an application of Daniel to the time of Pilate. Pilate, generally, being dated from 26 to 36/37 c.e. gLuke running his story from the time of Lysanias of Abilene in 40 b.c.e. - the year Antigonus captured Jerusalem and became King and High Priest of the Jews. Thus, an application of Daniel, by the Lukan writer, of 70 years from the execution of Antigonus.

This does not mean, of course, that the gospel Jesus was a historical figure. The gospel writers have used their literary, composite, Jesus figure to reflect Hasmonean history. Earlier Hasmonean history, viewed through a prophetic lens, has been placed within the end period of a 70 year application of Daniel.ch.9 from the end of the Hasmonean era.

Or, how about the crucifixion story in the Acts of Pilate - 7th year of Tiberius. Tiberius co-ruler from 12 c.e., sole ruler from 14 c.e. Thus, a crucifixion story set in either 19 or 21 c.e.

Run the numbers back 434 years (62 weeks from the co-regency of Tiberius) and one gets to Artaxerxes 20 th year around 446/5 b.c.e. Run 49 years forward from the sole rule of Tiberius in 14 c.e. and one gets to the 70 c.e.e fall of Jerusalem. Or, run 7 years from 19 c.e.(a date proposed for the rule of Pilate) to 26 c.e. - the usual dating of Pilate. Thus, a crucifixion story set in 21 c.e. is in the 'middle of the week'. Or, run 7 years from 26 c.e. to 33 c.e. and JC is crucified in the 'middle of the week in 30 c.e. Or run 7 years from 30 c.e. and a crucifixion in 36 c.e. - or 33 c.e.

Or run 490 years back from 26 c.e. and one gets the lst year of Artaxerxes in 465/4 b.c.e.

All the above demonstrates that Daniel's 70 weeks of years is a flexible prophetic time frame. One can use it for actual historical events - or one can use it for storytelling - as is done with the literary gospel figure of Jesus. It's a great numbers game to play.....have fun....

Of course, all this does not mean to indicate that people living over 2000 years ago had an accurate historical dating system.....lacking such - a prophetic time-frame was the simple way to go about writing 'salvation' history.

What the above examples do demonstrate is that the historical events of 37 b.c.e. were relevant to a 'salvation' interpretation of Hasmonean/Jewish history. It is that historical event that roots the gospel Jesus story to a historical foundation. It is the application of Daniel ch.9 to the historical events of 37 b.c.e. that holds out possibilities for understanding the gospel story of a literary, composite, figure of Jesus.

double post....

Thanks Maryhelena-- very interesting stuff!!

I wanted to share this Richard Carrier link that addresses a number of things from my earlier posts:


http://www.richardcarrier.info/doomsday.pdf

Kris wrote: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!!

One of the reasons I am cautious with Carrier's view is that I find it difficult to accept that large numbers of "the masses" had any sort of knowledge of details of Daniel's "prophetic times". I would have thought the more natural position would be to assume only a few intellectuals were worried by the "times" in Daniel.

Regarding some of the so-called "messianic" incidents related by Josephus, I wonder if it is simpler to think of these as expressions of mounting frustration in the lead up to the outbreak of war in 66 CE.

Kris wrote:Thanks Maryhelena-- very interesting stuff!!

I wanted to share this Richard Carrier link that addresses a number of things from my earlier posts:


http://www.richardcarrier.info/doomsday.pdf

Clever and provocative, as usual with Carrier. As I said elsewhere, I don't think the obvious reckoning yields a date of 30 or 33 CE as the end of the 70 weeks. That's because I think the beginning should be put at Jeremiah's (failed) prophecy, since that's what Daniel 9:25 seems to refer to (cf. Daniel 9:2). But obviously, there are different ways to calculate the times, and I am fine with thinking that some later people came up with 30-33 by their calculations.

The one who came with the calculation leading to 30 AD (and the reference of Carrier) is no other than Sextus Julius Africanus (160-240 AD), a Christian apologist, who wrote there was no conflict between the two genealogies of Jesus in gMatthew & gLuke. As I told Carrier long ago, of course, with hindsight and the bias of a Christian apologist, he was bound to find a system to get to the "right" date.
Africanus started the timeline at Artaxerxes I twentieth year, and used Jewish "short" years in order to reduce 490 down to 475 years. Here is the relevant passage from Africanus (bolding mine):

"On the Seventy Weeks of Daniel.
1. This passage, therefore, as it stands thus, touches on many marvellous things. At present, however, I shall speak only of those things in it which bear upon chronology, and matters connected therewith. That the passage speaks then of the advent of Christ, who was to manifest Himself after seventy weeks, is evident. For in the Saviour's time, or from Him, are transgressions abrogated, and sins brought to an end. And through remission, moreover, are iniquities, along with offences, blotted out by expiation; and an everlasting righteousness is preached, different from that which is by the law, and visions and prophecies (are) until John, and the Most Holy is anointed. For before the advent of the Saviour these things were not yet, and were therefore only looked for. And the beginning of the numbers, that is, of the seventy weeks which make up 490 years, the angel instructs us to take from the going forth of the commandment to answer and to build Jerusalem. And this happened in the twentieth year of the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia. For Nehemiah his cup-bearer besought him, and received the answer that Jerusalem should be built. And the word went forth commanding these things; for up to that time the city was desolate. For when Cyrus, after the seventy years' captivity, gave free permission to all to return who desired it, some of them under the leadership of Jesus she high priest and Zorobabel, and others after these under the leadership of Esdra, returned, but were prevented at first from building the temple, and from surrounding the city with a wall, on the plea that that had not been commanded.

2. It remained in this position, accordingly, until Nehemiah and the reign of Artaxerxes, and the 115th year of the sovereignty of the Persians. And from the capture of Jerusalem that makes 185 years. And at that time King Artaxerxes gave order that the city should be built; and Nehemiah being dispatched, superintended the work, and the street and the surrounding wall were built, as had been prophesied. And reckoning from that point, we make up seventy weeks to the time of Christ. For if we begin to reckon from any other point, and not from this, the periods will not correspond, and very many odd results will meet us. For if we begin the calculation of the seventy weeks from Cyrus and the first restoration, there will be upwards of one hundred years too many, and there will be a larger number if we begin from the day on which the angel gave the prophecy to Daniel, and a much larger number still if we begin from the commencement of the captivity. For we find the sovereignty of the Persians comprising a period of 230 years, and that of the Macedonians extending over 370 years, and froth that to the 16th [1092] year of Tiberius Caesar is a period of about 60 years.

3. It is by calculating from Artaxerxes, therefore, up to the time of Christ that the seventy weeks are made up, according to the numeration of the Jews. For from Nehemiah, who was despatched by Artaxerxes to build Jerusalem in the 115th year of the Persian empire, and the 4th year of the 83d Olympiad, and the 20th year of the reign of Artaxerxes himself, up to ibis date, which was the second year of the 202d Olympiad, and the 16th year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, there are reckoned 475 years, which make 490 according to the Hebrew numeration, as they measure the years by the course of the moon; so that, as is easy to show, their year consists of 354 days, while the solar year has 3651/4days. For the latter exceeds the period of twelve months, according to the moon's course, by 111/4 days. Hence the Greeks and the Jews insert three intercalary months every 8 years. For 8 times 111/4 days makes up 3 months. Therefore 475 years make 59 periods of 8 years each, and 3 months besides. But since thus there are 3 intercalary months every 8 years, we get thus 15 years minus a few days; and these being added to the 475 years, make up in all the 70 weeks. (http://mb-soft.com/believe/txua/africanu.htm)

In his propaganda piece (http://www.richardcarrier.info/doomsday.pdf), Carrier is not saying who first devised that convenient but very dubious calculation.
In my debate with him on his old blog, he said if Africanus did it, then Jews before 30 AD would have also arrived to the same result, through the same calculation, and therefore expected their Messiah to come around 30 AD.
I disagreed thoroughly.

Cordially, Bernard

My debate with Carrier can be seen here:
http://richardcarrier.blogspot.ca/2011/ ... ssiah.html

Here is an extract:
Richard Carrier said...
Bernard said… And Jews making the same calculations than Africanus before the fact (that is 30-32) is totally unproven.

RC: It doesn't need to be. It's the only straightforward calculation to make. As I explain in the body of this blog. Any others require contortions. If Africanus had to engage in contortions to make Daniel fit the date, then you'd be right: he is retrofitting and we can't assume anyone else would have come up with the same result before the fact. But when we know pre-Christian Jews between 125 and 50 B.C. saw Daniel as predicting the messiah (as the Dead Sea Scrolls prove they did), there is only one calculation that one can make that requires no post hoc distortions, and that's the one that gets us a date between 23 and 38 A.D., exactly as I said (and using the Jewish calendar, the most obvious one for Jews to use, that date comes out at 30 or 31).

BM: BTW, Africanus' calculation is less than straightforward. He originated his timing from the time of a Persian king (Artaxerxes) living well after Daniel supposed lifetime (very unlikely that Daniel would be believed to have done that).

RC: You mean it's unlikely Christians and Jews would believe the Prophet Daniel predicted the act of Artaxerxes? Are you even listening to what you are saying? You want them to believe he accurately predicted the coming of the messiah, but none of the calendrical signs leading up to it? That's just illogical. Obviously they believed he was a prophet of God relaying what God told him. The fact that the Artaxerxes part "came true" (from their POV) was for Africanus, and the Jews before him, confirmation that Daniel was a reliable prophet.

BM: In order to get the desired result, he interpreted "year" as lunar year to get a reduced number of days, then converted the total in solar years.

RC: The Jewish calendar was indeed lunar. That's exactly the math a 1st century B.C. Jew would engage in. They were not commonly using any other calendar at the time. That's indeed Africanus' point (who evidently knew more about historical calendrics than you do)

Cordially, Bernard

About what Carrier wrote:
"The Jewish calendar was indeed lunar. That's exactly the math a 1st century B.C. Jew would engage in. They were not commonly using any other calendar at the time. That's indeed Africanus' point (who evidently knew more about historical calendrics than you do)."
Does anyone know who, before Africanus, used Jewish "short" years? I know of none.

Furthermore, the author of 'Daniel' used regular solar years. As I noted in http://historical-jesus.info/daniel.html
"... according to Daniel 9:2
[around 538]... I, Daniel, understood by the books the number of the years specified by the word of the LORD through Jeremiah the prophet, that He would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem."
the "desolations" will last up to 516 (seventy years after its destruction by the Babylonians in 586), indicating the author considered Jerusalem restored and rebuilt by that date (which is the year of the reconsecration of the temple "in the sixth year of the reign of King Darius" according to Ezra 6:15).

Notes:
a) ...
b) Daniel-2 had seventy years between 586 and 516, which proves he was using solar years (365 days) for counting and certainly not short "Jewish years" (354 days --which would have resulted in seventy-two years). Actually the Jewish calendar consisted of two short years followed by a long year (a short year with an added month) in order to get back in phase with solar years. That means, for any long duration, the number of "Jewish years" and solar years is the same. See more information here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_calendar] "

Cordially, Bernard

Richard Carrier wrote:The Jewish calendar was indeed lunar. That's exactly the math a 1st century B.C. Jew would engage in. They were not commonly using any other calendar at the time. That's indeed Africanus' point (who evidently knew more about historical calendrics than you do)

They may have used a lunar year, which was a convenient way to simplify a calendar, as there were usually 12 lunar months each seasonal year, but it had been routinely intercalated to correspond to the seasonal year (the intercalation scheme that Jews used was derived from the Babylonian system, which was adopted by the Macedonian Greeks, and there were 7 intercalated months every 19 years - Africanus was using another scheme used in ancient times by Greeks, called the Metonic cycle, I think).

Astronomers routinely used a simplified 360 day "Egyptian" year (ignoring the 5 intercalary days each year). The Arab calendar is also lunar, but they make no attempt to intercalate as their calendar was not intended to synchronize with the seasons (they were pastoral and did not generally grow wheat), so their years cycle faster than the solar year by about 11 days a year.

DCH

The Second Temple priesthood were accomplished astronomers.

Months were determined by the moon strictly. But to keep things in synch, every so often- every third year- they would add a month- called AdarII, to the jewish Calendar.

Over the course of a year, the Lunar Calendar was short on average of 11 days. For the Solar, it is short a little over 6 hours.

To add to the difficulty, when did the new moon begin to mark the beginning of a new month- it can be a tricky business as sunlight would get in the way.

The lunar Calendar made things difficult economically. As Rome grew in power and dominance, it made sense to eliminate the lunar in favor of the solar calendar, which was in line with the growing seasons as a sedcondary benefit. Caesar put it into play around 46 B.C., and it was based on an earlier Egyptian Calendar.

Though the months did not correspond to the phases of the moon, the Romans retained the old references to them, i.e. the ides of March was the 15th of the month, even though in the solar Calendar that did not necessarily mark a full moon.

source Hagan "Year of the Passover"