Error in link. Try this one. http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/23_parallel.html

Writings yes, My point is to demonstrate the chaistic structure of Daniel, especially chapter 9. Also this is my point with the websites. I do not necessarily agree with everything else on the sites.

You start with the "prophecy that Jerusalem would be rebuilt" not with the "word or command to rebuild and restore". There is a lot of difference. Even the JPS translates this as "the word to" not "the prophecy that". It appears that even the Jews do not see this as referring to Jeremiah's prophecy.

I start my time clock with the only command or word to both "rebuild" (physically), and "restore" (politically). This seems to be the best fit.

One does not have to try to jam the square peg of "prophecy that" into the round hole of "word to" for this one to fit.

The only reason for one not to use the best fit for the text is in effort to puzzle fit AE IV into this. He is still over 100 years off.

 

Various translations of the Bible can include "puzzle fitting" for personal agendas. That's why I do not depend on any of them. 

 

The first decree listed above was made by Cyrus (538 or 537 BC) to be found in Ezra 1. "In the first year of Cyrus the king of Persia". This decree was for the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem, and did not address specifically the city itself. Therefore I prefer the latter decree. 

<snip>

The third decree listed above was made by Artaxerxes I (~457 BC) to be found in Ezra 7. This decree provides the funding, and also authorized the establishment of some self governance. That is why I prefer this one. 

I see PJTS point.

We start with the word or command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem.

That makes the 490 years "cut off" from the front side of the 2300 years.

Subtracting 490 from 457 BC and compensating for not having a zero year (add one year), takes us to 34 AD.

2300 - 490 = 1810 AD.

When we come to 34 AD, what we have left is 1810 years.

1810 + 34 = 1844 AD.

Yes it is subtracted. Just a matter of perspective and semantics.

I stand corrected. I should have read his post more carefully.

AtheistSam wrote:

This does not make sense to me - gramster you don't depend on "puzzle fitting" and yet you have a preference for your decrees? How does that work? I have taken the opportunity to highlight from your posts as a reference to my question.

gramster wrote:

Various translations of the Bible can include "puzzle fitting" for personal agendas. That's why I do not depend on any of them. 

gramster wrote:

 

The first decree listed above was made by Cyrus (538 or 537 BC) to be found in Ezra 1. "In the first year of Cyrus the king of Persia". This decree was for the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem, and did not address specifically the city itself. Therefore I prefer the latter decree. 

<snip>

The third decree listed above was made by Artaxerxes I (~457 BC) to be found in Ezra 7. This decree provides the funding, and also authorized the establishment of some self governance. That is why I prefer this one. 

 

Welcome AtheistSam.

I like your car.

Right now it does look like puzzle fitting. But I'm not finished yet. When all is said and done, it will be obvious to the intellectually honest that the pieces fit like hand and glove, and the other views don't cut the mustard. But like with the previous chapters, neon road signs will be ignored, and those who do not wish to believe in God will still be roaring down the wrong way on a one way road.

 

 

 

 

gramster wrote:

Error in link. Try this one. http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/23_parallel.html

Writings yes, My point is to demonstrate the chaistic structure of Daniel, especially chapter 9. Also this is my point with the websites. I do not necessarily agree with everything else on the sites.

So? The site you mention does not specify that Daniel is poetry, I'm aware a lot of the Hebrew Bible is poetry, but right now we aren't discussing Psalms, Proverbs or Genesis. A whole lot of it is also allegory and story-telling aka parables. One of the purposes of the scriptures to a Jew was examples of how to lead a life of which the god would approve.

gramster wrote:

You start with the "prophecy that Jerusalem would be rebuilt" not with the "word or command to rebuild and restore". There is a lot of difference. Even the JPS translates this as "the word to" not "the prophecy that". It appears that even the Jews do not see this as referring to Jeremiah's prophecy.

After Cyrus conquered Babylon he commanded, that the inhabitants who had been displaced be allowed to return and  "I returned the images of the gods, who had resided there [i.e., in Babylon], to their places and I let them dwell in eternal abodes. I gathered all their inhabitants and returned to them their dwellings." - from line 32 of the Cyrus Cylinder - see - http://www.livius.org/ct-cz/cyrus_I/cyrus_cylinder2.html

And according to Josephus - http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-11.htm in book XI Chapter 1 - "Thus saith Cyrus the king: Since God Almighty hath appointed me to be king of the habitable earth, I believe that he is that God which the nation of the Israelites worship; for indeed he foretold my name by the prophets, and that I should build him a house at Jerusalem, in the country of Judea."

According to Josephus this order was in the 1st year of Cyrus' reign after conquering Babylon.

In Isaiah, specifically 2nd Isaiah chapters 40 - 55, written around the time of Cyrus we have this in Isaiah 44:28 - "That saith of Cyrus: 'He is My shepherd, and shall perform all My pleasure'; even saying of Jerusalem: 'She shall be built'; and to the temple: 'My foundation shall be laid."

gramster wrote:

I start my time clock with the only command or word to both "rebuild" (physically), and "restore" (politically). This seems to be the best fit.

So in essence you start your clock erroneously only such that you can fit Jesus into your interpreted idea by back tracking from when he supposedly was executed. Your problem however is both scripture and secular documents are against you here.

gramster wrote:

One does not have to try to jam the square peg of "prophecy that" into the round hole of "word to" for this one to fit.

You have used a sledge hammer and beat the piece in with such force it shattered before your eyes.

gramster wrote:

The only reason for one not to use the best fit for the text is in effort to puzzle fit AE IV into this. He is still over 100 years off.

 

You have no best fit here, you have damaged the pieces to the point they have become unrecognizable.

gramster wrote:

Cut off does not have to mean subtracted. It is simply that this time is "cut out" of the 2300 years for closer examination. That would not affect the time frame for the 2300 year prophecy. Seventy years are cut off, amputated, divided concerning your people. This time frame is being looked at in particular as pertaining to "Daniel's people" or the Jews. After this time period the rest of the 2300 years does not pertain to the Jews in particular.

What is relevant to Daniel has been explained. The Jews were given 490 years to get their act together. I will detail this when I finish my interpretation of Daniel 9.

You still haven't detailed what your plans are for the 2300 (years) days.

You have many other problems with what you have presented in regard to Daniel 9

1- There is more than 1 way that this prophecy can be fulfilled, therefore it fails the specific requirement of being a truly miraculous prophecy.

2- There was no decree given to Nehemiah. He had letters of safe passage, and authorization to cut wood for remodeling the Temple.

3 - The Temple had already been rebuilt 70 years before Nehemiah and he was only remodeling it.

See - Ezra 6:15 JPS - "And this house was finished on the third day of the month Adar, which was in the sixth year of the reign of Darius the king." - 516 to 520 BCE approx.

4 - Jews used a 365 day year though they used a lunar calendar month. They adjusted for this every few years by adding a month so that it came out to 365 day years.

5- The rest of the prophecies of Daniel were never fulfilled if this pertains to Jesus.

6 - You completely ignore the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks which result in 2 anointed ones.

7 - As I mentioned before, the text refers to A messiah, anointed one or moshiach not THE MESSIAH, as there is no definitive article before anointed one or messiah.

There are other problems I have mentioned along the way but you have made so many and they are scattered about it's not worth the time to go back and collect them all. I'll do that when you finally summarize chapter 9.

 

gramster wrote:

I see PJTS point.

We start with the word or command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem.

That makes the 490 years "cut off" from the front side of the 2300 years.

Subtracting 490 from 457 BC and compensating for not having a zero year (add one year), takes us to 34 AD.

2300 - 490 = 1810 AD.

When we come to 34 AD, what we have left is 1810 years.

1810 + 34 = 1844 AD.

Yes it is subtracted. Just a matter of perspective and semantics.

I stand corrected. I should have read his post more carefully.

Now you got it.

1844 had many notable events but apparently the lynching of Joseph Smith must have been what he was trying to tell us.

Or the election of James Polk as US President.

Or Samuel Morse sending the 1st telegraph message.

Or Jesus came back and took one look around, saw Jews were still being persecuted figured they kill him again so he departed for one of the other habitable planets where Daddy was also playing with his toys.

 

Two sites that I listed from wikipedia do illustrate the "poetic" structure of Daniel. The other site gives a brief discussion regarding the use of this literary style in Hebrew literature. The main point of these websites is to familiarize the reader with this very common literary style, and give illustrations of this from a source other than just "Gramps".

It is like introducing someone to western poetry that has never been exposed to it. Once they understand how it works, they can appreciate the works of Whitman, Poe, Auden, and the others. When happening upon a poem they would recognize and appreciate it as such.

In Hebrew literature "poetry" was more than just rhyme or rhythm. Poetry was used to emphasize a point, and can be utilized to help clarify a passage, as in Daniel. It is quite simple really.

In regards to decrees to build and restore Jerusalem, are you now saying that this is referring to Cyrus, instead of Jeremiah's "prophecy"?

As to the decree or word that I have suggested, it is the only one that "restores" the city to it's original standing, allowing a political structure of self government to be set up. Following that decree building of the wall commenced "but in troubled times", as prophesied. But it did not go well until Nehemiah came on to the scene.

  

Approximately 75% of the Tenach (Old Testament) is poetry. All of Psalms and Proverbs are Hebrew poetry. Even the book of Genesis is full of Poetry.

and - Parallel poetry (as in Genesis 1 ....and - Psalms 119:105...... and - Proverbs 3:1..... and Psalm 15:1-3 . . .  and Isaiah 6:10 . . . and Proverbs 11:19-20.

Biblical authors, wishing to emphasize some point, often made use of a variety of Hebrew literary devices in the structure of their writings. Hebrew poetry consisted of juxapositions of related or contrasting ideas. A common structure was the chiasm. This has implications for the prophetic dreams and visions recorded in it. William H. Shea Ph.D. (Archeology)^[1] has suggested that the book of Daniel could be viewed as a double chiasm (see enclosed figure). The proposed symmetry, however, is spoiled by the role given to 9:26.

until the anointed king.

It is claimed by Jews for Judaism that it does not read "the Messiah the Prince," but, having no article, it is to be rendered "a mashiach ["anointed one," "messiah"], a prince," and that the word mashiach is nowhere used in the Jewish Scriptures as a proper name, but as a title of authority of a king or a high priest.^[5] The Judaica Press translation [2] translates it as "the anointed king." מָשִׁיחַ נָגִיד "mashiyah-nagid" in Daniel 9:25 translates to "anointed prince" with no article (e.g. "the" messiah prince).

PJTS has been consistent in going back and forth between two "commands or words". He either tries to make the command or word "to" proceed, a prophecy "about" by Jeremiah in order to "pound" AE IV into the picture, or to insist that the incomplete "command or word" by Cyrus must be the one in order to try to discredit Jesus as the Messiah.

I have been consistent on just one "command or word". The one by Artaxeres in 457 BC that not only allows building to proceed, but also provides ample funding, and the restoration of civil self governance. Interestingly enough, there are two words in the prophecy "build and restore Jerusalem". This is the only command that allows for the restoration of Jerusalem to it's original position politically. All of the other commands address only the building activities.

jcgadfly wrote:

gramster wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

 

gramster wrote:

Error in link. Try this one. http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/23_parallel.html

Writings yes, My point is to demonstrate the chaistic structure of Daniel, especially chapter 9. Also this is my point with the websites. I do not necessarily agree with everything else on the sites.

So? The site you mention does not specify that Daniel is poetry, I'm aware a lot of the Hebrew Bible is poetry, but right now we aren't discussing Psalms, Proverbs or Genesis. A whole lot of it is also allegory and story-telling aka parables. One of the purposes of the scriptures to a Jew was examples of how to lead a life of which the god would approve.

gramster wrote:

You start with the "prophecy that Jerusalem would be rebuilt" not with the "word or command to rebuild and restore". There is a lot of difference. Even the JPS translates this as "the word to" not "the prophecy that". It appears that even the Jews do not see this as referring to Jeremiah's prophecy.

After Cyrus conquered Babylon he commanded, that the inhabitants who had been displaced be allowed to return and  "I returned the images of the gods, who had resided there [i.e., in Babylon], to their places and I let them dwell in eternal abodes. I gathered all their inhabitants and returned to them their dwellings." - from line 32 of the Cyrus Cylinder - see - http://www.livius.org/ct-cz/cyrus_I/cyrus_cylinder2.html

And according to Josephus - http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-11.htm in book XI Chapter 1 - "Thus saith Cyrus the king: Since God Almighty hath appointed me to be king of the habitable earth, I believe that he is that God which the nation of the Israelites worship; for indeed he foretold my name by the prophets, and that I should build him a house at Jerusalem, in the country of Judea."

According to Josephus this order was in the 1st year of Cyrus' reign after conquering Babylon.

In Isaiah, specifically 2nd Isaiah chapters 40 - 55, written around the time of Cyrus we have this in Isaiah 44:28 - "That saith of Cyrus: 'He is My shepherd, and shall perform all My pleasure'; even saying of Jerusalem: 'She shall be built'; and to the temple: 'My foundation shall be laid."

gramster wrote:

I start my time clock with the only command or word to both "rebuild" (physically), and "restore" (politically). This seems to be the best fit.

So in essence you start your clock erroneously only such that you can fit Jesus into your interpreted idea by back tracking from when he supposedly was executed. Your problem however is both scripture and secular documents are against you here.

gramster wrote:

One does not have to try to jam the square peg of "prophecy that" into the round hole of "word to" for this one to fit.

You have used a sledge hammer and beat the piece in with such force it shattered before your eyes.

gramster wrote:

The only reason for one not to use the best fit for the text is in effort to puzzle fit AE IV into this. He is still over 100 years off.

 

You have no best fit here, you have damaged the pieces to the point they have become unrecognizable.

Two sites that I listed from wikipedia do illustrate the "poetic" structure of Daniel. The other site gives a brief discussion regarding the use of this literary style in Hebrew literature. The main point of these websites is to familiarize the reader with this very common literary style, and give illustrations of this from a source other than just "Gramps".

It is like introducing someone to western poetry that has never been exposed to it. Once they understand how it works, they can appreciate the works of Whitman, Poe, Auden, and the others. When happening upon a poem they would recognize and appreciate it as such.

In Hebrew literature "poetry" was more than just rhyme or rhythm. Poetry was used to emphasize a point, and can be utilized to help clarify a passage, as in Daniel. It is quite simple really.

In regards to decrees to build and restore Jerusalem, are you now saying that this is referring to Cyrus, instead of Jeremiah's "prophecy"?

As to the decree or word that I have suggested, it is the only one that "restores" the city to it's original standing, allowing a political structure of self government to be set up. Following that decree building of the wall commenced "but in troubled times", as prophesied. But it did not go well until Nehemiah came on to the scene.

 

 

Again, all the poetic structure means is that the writer used this particular poetic structure. Any special meaning ascribed to that structure is coming  from you and not the text.

It's actually even simpler than you believe you're making it. And PJTS is not "just now saying it" about the decrees - he's been pretty consistent all the way through. Do you know which decree you're talking about or do you just rotate them in as needed?

"Poetic Structure". Alternating parallels and chaisms. It's not complicated.

Psalms 37:3-5

A. Trust in the Lord and do good;

B. so you will dwell in the land, and enjoy security.

A'. Take delight in the Lord,

B'. and he will give you the desires of your heart.

A". Commit your way to the Lord; trust him,

B". and he will act.

These lines alternate between two main subjects. A, A', and A", all relate to advice about how we should act towards God. B, B', and B", all relate to how God will respond.

A Hebrew writer would not "throw in" another subject, or stick one in out of place. That is what people are doing when they try to make AE IV fit into the lines of Daniel 9:25-27.

Since this type of literary structure was very common in Hebrew writings, a Jewish reader would be thoroughly confused if the author had "broken" this poetic form right in the middle of it.

Not just Gramps. It is obvious as the color blue.

PJTS has been consistent in going back and forth between two "commands or words". He either tries to make the command or word "to" proceed, a prophecy "about" by Jeremiah in order to "pound" AE IV into the picture, or to insist that the incomplete "command or word" by Cyrus must be the one in order to try to discredit Jesus as the Messiah.

I have been consistent on just one "command or word". The one by Artaxeres in 457 BC that not only allows building to proceed, but also provides ample funding, and the restoration of civil self governance. Interestingly enough, there are two words in the prophecy "build and restore Jerusalem". This is the only command that allows for the restoration of Jerusalem to it's original position politically. All of the other commands address only the building activities.

jcgadfly wrote:

gramster wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

gramster wrote:

I see PJTS point.

We start with the word or command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem.

That makes the 490 years "cut off" from the front side of the 2300 years.

Subtracting 490 from 457 BC and compensating for not having a zero year (add one year), takes us to 34 AD.

2300 - 490 = 1810 AD.

When we come to 34 AD, what we have left is 1810 years.

1810 + 34 = 1844 AD.

Yes it is subtracted. Just a matter of perspective and semantics.

I stand corrected. I should have read his post more carefully.

Now you got it.

1844 had many notable events but apparently the lynching of Joseph Smith must have been what he was trying to tell us.

Or the election of James Polk as US President.

Or Samuel Morse sending the 1st telegraph message.

Or Jesus came back and took one look around, saw Jews were still being persecuted figured they kill him again so he departed for one of the other habitable planets where Daddy was also playing with his toys.

1844 puts us down in a time period referred to as the "latter days", or the "end times". This prophecy obviously did not refer to the "2nd coming", as the "Millerites" had wrongly predicted. The bible warns people against trying to put a date to the coming of the Lord.

Daniel had good reason to be confused and vexed about this prophecy from his perspective.

This date is about something else altogether. Something that the Hebrew's would have been very familiar with, but not so with us. I will give more on this later.

 

So the "prophecy" only concerns the Hebrews back then and not us now? What happened to your "longer view"?

"Put a date", not prophecy or discuss the event. I have never stated that the "prophecy" concerns only the Hebrew in BC times. No need to put words in my mouth.

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

gramster wrote:

gramster wrote:

gramster wrote:

Daniel 9 verses 25 to 27 need a proper understanding of ancient Hebrew literary structure to be read and understood properly. Here we will need the "Johnny Quest decoder ring". And fortunately we have one on hand.

The overwhelming majority of the Toreh was written in "poetic form". or "Hebrew Parallelism". This is much different than how we do things in English, so we will take a brief look at this.

Daniel 9:25 to 27 forms a "chiastic pattern". I am including the following links so that the reader can 1. know that this is not just a fabrication of Gramps. 2. gain a basic understanding of this principle.

http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/23_parallel.html

Jeff A Benner, a linguist gives a brief introduction to ancient Hebrew poetic parallelism commonly used in the old testament books.

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

Here it is demonstrated how the Book of Daniel is laid out in a double chaismatic formation for the purpose of emphasis.

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

Here historicist Shea has a very simple visual graphic (of Daniel 9: 25 to 27 in particular) that demonstrates very clearly the existing chaistic pattern of the text.

This is a most fascinating principle, and well worth the time and effort to get acquainted with.

In short, the subjects being discussed can be represented by simple letters of the alphabet for demonstration purposes.

The subjects in Daniel 9 under discussion are "Jerusalem", and "The anointed".

The chaistic structure is simply ABCDCBA. Below is the basic structure.

 

A Jerusalem Construction

   B Anointed One

      C Jerusalem Construction

         D Anointed One

      C' Jerusalem Destroyed

   B' Anointed One

A' Jerusalem Destroyed

 

The first subject A will correspond with the last subject A'. The second subject B will correspond with the next to last subject B' etc. Knowing this literary structure is crucial to determining just which subject is being discussed in each text.

We will be exploring this more as we move ahead.

 

Now that we have established Parallelism and chiastic structures as common in ancient Hebrew literature, we will take a closer look at Daniel 9:25-27. I will be using Shea's format for clarity.

A. Jerusalem Construction (Daniel 9:25a) ASV

   "Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem."

       B. Anointed One (Daniel 9:25b)

          "unto the anointed one, the prince, shall be seven weeks, and three score plus 2 weeks:"

              C. Jerusalem Construction (Daniel 9:25c)

                 "It shall be built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times"

                     D. Anointed One (Daniel 9:26a)

                         "And after the three score and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and have nothing"

              C'. Jerusalem Destroyed (Daniel 9:26b)

                  "and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and sanctuary, and the end there of shall be .                  with a flood, and even to the end shall be war, desolation, and destruction."

       B'. Anointed One (Daniel 9:27a)

          "And he will make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the                  sacrifice and oblation to cease;"

A'. Jerusalem Destroyed (Daniel 9:27b)

   "And upon the wing of  abominations shall come one that  makes desolate; one even unto the full end, and that     .   determined, shall wrath be poured out upon the desolate."

What has been established in the links above is that this type of literary structure was not only used, but quite common in the Hebrew writings. It is only rational to believe that a Jewish reader on the time would readily pick up on this, and understand it's ramifications.

As redneF pointed out previously, it is essential for us to understand the various principles and idiosyncrasies of the language being translated. This principle in particular is valuable especially in the interpretation of this text, as without it some confusion exists as to the subjects being discussed.

2 Princes - There are two very distinct princes being discussed here, a "good prince", and a "bad prince". It is important to know which one is being discussed.

C' 9:26b "And the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and sanctuary...

B' 9:27a "And he shall make a covenant with many for one week: ...

Reading this from a "western readers" perspective, this looks like 9:27a is referring to the "bad prince" of 9:26b. But this is not the case. According to the chiasmatic structure, subject B' is related not to C', but to B. That means that 9:27a is referring to the "good prince" of 9:25b.

Putting subject B together with subject B' we get the following.

9:25b "unto the anointed one, the prince shall be seven weeks, and three score and two weeks.

9:27a "And he will make a covenant with many for one week..."

This does not refer to the "bad prince" Antiochus IV in the 2nd century BC. A 2nd century writer would not have written this like way if that were his intentions. Surely his intended audience would have been gravely confused.

This is referring the "good prince", and an anointed one.

Jerusalem Construction and Destruction - Another mistake that reading this text as a "westerner" can lead to, is the assumption that certain parts of this timetable is specifically referring to the construction or destruction of Jerusalem. 

Even thought the construction and destruction of Jerusalem is closely related to the rest of the text, no specific time passage addresses this directly. The events of the construction and destruction of Jerusalem are addressed here, and interrelated to the rest of the text, but no direct time tables are given to these events.

Time References - The time reference given here relates only to the "good prince" in these verses.

A. 9:25a - "... from the going forth of the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem" B. 9:25b "unto the anointed one, the prince, shall be seven weeks, and three score and two weeks:"

This gives us the time table for the arrival of an "anointed one". One may assume that this time table is broken up into specific and differing events. This is not necessarily so. One who is unfamiliar with the phrase "four score and seven years ago", may also assume that the "four score" refers to one event, while the "seven years" refers to another.

These are examples of "word plays". Various word plays were common in the Hebrew, and not uncommon in our language as well.

Since no specific event is tied in this literary structure to this time table except the arrival of an anointed one, it is evident that an anointed one would be expected to arrive after 69 weeks.

The next time reference given is in 9:26a. This is right in the middle of the chiasm, thus giving it special emphasis.

D. 9:26a "And after the three score and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and shall have nothing."

9:25a gives the time table for the "anointed one". 9:26 a gives us a very important event that follows closely.

The next reference to an "anointed one", and the one matching the one referenced in vs 9:25b, is in 9:27a.

"And he will make a covenant with many for one week: in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifices and oblation to cease;"

Something will happen in the middle of the 70th week that will "do away" with the sacrificial system.

Now let's put the verses relating to the "anointed one" together and read it like a Jew of the time would understand it.

9:25b "unto the anointed one, the prince, shall be seven weeks, and three score and two weeks:"

9:26a "And after the three score and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and have nothing."

9:27a "And he will make a covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifices and oblation to cease;"

Now this makes perfect sense. The writer did not leave his audience guessing as to the meaning of this text. By using the common form of chiastic structure, the writer explicitly communicated to his readers just as he intended.   

All the twisting of meaning and squiming you are doing to beat these pieces into the puzzle so Jesus can be the one is fun to watch.

You know what I think, see post #952 and #951 neither of which you answered.

Also see post #957 where you come up with 1844 CE. See my response in #959 where Joseph Smith is murdered or Polk is elected President.

See posts: #872, #895,  #903, #910, #913, #931, # 946 where I'm clear as to what I think.

2 Annointed ones, Cyrus and Onias.

Daniel 9:25 JPS Hebrew version cited in post #913 - "Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem unto one anointed, a prince, shall be seven weeks;.."

You combine the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks in what you call Dan 9:25 b).

However JPS shows them as 2 different periods. going on as "and for threescore and two weeks, it shall be built again, with broad place and moat, but in troublous times."

Then in v26 JPS - "And after the threescore and two weeks shall an anointed one be cut off, and be no more;" this is anointed one #2 - who is killed namely Onais.

and in the 2nd part - Antiochus shows up - "and the people of a prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; but his end shall be with a flood; and unto the end of the war desolations are determined."

And continues in v27 - "And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week; and for half of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease; and upon the wing of detestable things shall be that which causeth appalment; and that until the extermination wholly determined be poured out upon that which causeth appalment."

See my previous post where I went into detail.

I especially love how you bounce from translation to translation in order to get your mangled puzzle pieces to fit.

 

#951 and #952, You:

Challenge the "poetic form" of Daniel 9:25-27. The proof is in the text. The subjects "alternate" as in "alternating parallels", which is "Common Hebrew Poetic Form". The works of Poe, Whitman, Auden, and others are not poetry because someone says so. They are poetry because of the rhythm and flow of the text. Daniel 9:25-27 in form are "alternating parallels", and form a perfect "chaism" as well. Therefore they are by definition "Hebrew Poetry".

Point out that the temple was already built. Yes, but according to Ezra, Artaxeres is listed as one of the kings involved in this building. His part came later. The text refers to the restoration of Jerusalem which included more than just building the temple structure. Artaxeres was the only one to give permission for the full restoration of the city both physically and politically. I am sure we will never agree on a starting date. Cyrus' date gave permission to rebuild the temple, but lacked the permission for full restoration of the city to it's original standing.

Challenge the "specific requirements" of the prophecy. The prophecy is specific. Our understanding of the events in history and how they relate are in question. There are only maybe 3 or 4 dates that can possibly be considered. This is very limiting. One of these few dates has to match up to the fulfillment. One can not just "pick any date".

The rest of the prophecies in Daniel?? No specifics are given here.

You insist on two anointed ones despite the fact that they go against the literary form of the text. We will never agree on this as long as you insist on reading this from a western point of view.

 

gramster wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

gramster wrote:

gramster wrote:

gramster wrote:

Daniel 9 verses 25 to 27 need a proper understanding of ancient Hebrew literary structure to be read and understood properly. Here we will need the "Johnny Quest decoder ring". And fortunately we have one on hand.

The overwhelming majority of the Toreh was written in "poetic form". or "Hebrew Parallelism". This is much different than how we do things in English, so we will take a brief look at this.

Daniel 9:25 to 27 forms a "chiastic pattern". I am including the following links so that the reader can 1. know that this is not just a fabrication of Gramps. 2. gain a basic understanding of this principle.

http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/23_parallel.html

Jeff A Benner, a linguist gives a brief introduction to ancient Hebrew poetic parallelism commonly used in the old testament books.

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

Here it is demonstrated how the Book of Daniel is laid out in a double chaismatic formation for the purpose of emphasis.

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

Here historicist Shea has a very simple visual graphic (of Daniel 9: 25 to 27 in particular) that demonstrates very clearly the existing chaistic pattern of the text.

This is a most fascinating principle, and well worth the time and effort to get acquainted with.

In short, the subjects being discussed can be represented by simple letters of the alphabet for demonstration purposes.

The subjects in Daniel 9 under discussion are "Jerusalem", and "The anointed".

The chaistic structure is simply ABCDCBA. Below is the basic structure.

 

A Jerusalem Construction

   B Anointed One

      C Jerusalem Construction

         D Anointed One

      C' Jerusalem Destroyed

   B' Anointed One

A' Jerusalem Destroyed

 

The first subject A will correspond with the last subject A'. The second subject B will correspond with the next to last subject B' etc. Knowing this literary structure is crucial to determining just which subject is being discussed in each text.

We will be exploring this more as we move ahead.

 

Now that we have established Parallelism and chiastic structures as common in ancient Hebrew literature, we will take a closer look at Daniel 9:25-27. I will be using Shea's format for clarity.

A. Jerusalem Construction (Daniel 9:25a) ASV

   "Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem."

       B. Anointed One (Daniel 9:25b)

          "unto the anointed one, the prince, shall be seven weeks, and three score plus 2 weeks:"

              C. Jerusalem Construction (Daniel 9:25c)

                 "It shall be built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times"

                     D. Anointed One (Daniel 9:26a)

                         "And after the three score and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and have nothing"

              C'. Jerusalem Destroyed (Daniel 9:26b)

                  "and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and sanctuary, and the end there of shall be .                  with a flood, and even to the end shall be war, desolation, and destruction."

       B'. Anointed One (Daniel 9:27a)

          "And he will make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the                  sacrifice and oblation to cease;"

A'. Jerusalem Destroyed (Daniel 9:27b)

   "And upon the wing of  abominations shall come one that  makes desolate; one even unto the full end, and that     .   determined, shall wrath be poured out upon the desolate."

What has been established in the links above is that this type of literary structure was not only used, but quite common in the Hebrew writings. It is only rational to believe that a Jewish reader on the time would readily pick up on this, and understand it's ramifications.

As redneF pointed out previously, it is essential for us to understand the various principles and idiosyncrasies of the language being translated. This principle in particular is valuable especially in the interpretation of this text, as without it some confusion exists as to the subjects being discussed.

2 Princes - There are two very distinct princes being discussed here, a "good prince", and a "bad prince". It is important to know which one is being discussed.

C' 9:26b "And the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and sanctuary...

B' 9:27a "And he shall make a covenant with many for one week: ...

Reading this from a "western readers" perspective, this looks like 9:27a is referring to the "bad prince" of 9:26b. But this is not the case. According to the chiasmatic structure, subject B' is related not to C', but to B. That means that 9:27a is referring to the "good prince" of 9:25b.

Putting subject B together with subject B' we get the following.

9:25b "unto the anointed one, the prince shall be seven weeks, and three score and two weeks.

9:27a "And he will make a covenant with many for one week..."

This does not refer to the "bad prince" Antiochus IV in the 2nd century BC. A 2nd century writer would not have written this like way if that were his intentions. Surely his intended audience would have been gravely confused.

This is referring the "good prince", and an anointed one.

Jerusalem Construction and Destruction - Another mistake that reading this text as a "westerner" can lead to, is the assumption that certain parts of this timetable is specifically referring to the construction or destruction of Jerusalem. 

Even thought the construction and destruction of Jerusalem is closely related to the rest of the text, no specific time passage addresses this directly. The events of the construction and destruction of Jerusalem are addressed here, and interrelated to the rest of the text, but no direct time tables are given to these events.

Time References - The time reference given here relates only to the "good prince" in these verses.

A. 9:25a - "... from the going forth of the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem" B. 9:25b "unto the anointed one, the prince, shall be seven weeks, and three score and two weeks:"

This gives us the time table for the arrival of an "anointed one". One may assume that this time table is broken up into specific and differing events. This is not necessarily so. One who is unfamiliar with the phrase "four score and seven years ago", may also assume that the "four score" refers to one event, while the "seven years" refers to another.

These are examples of "word plays". Various word plays were common in the Hebrew, and not uncommon in our language as well.

Since no specific event is tied in this literary structure to this time table except the arrival of an anointed one, it is evident that an anointed one would be expected to arrive after 69 weeks.

The next time reference given is in 9:26a. This is right in the middle of the chiasm, thus giving it special emphasis.

D. 9:26a "And after the three score and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and shall have nothing."

9:25a gives the time table for the "anointed one". 9:26 a gives us a very important event that follows closely.

The next reference to an "anointed one", and the one matching the one referenced in vs 9:25b, is in 9:27a.

"And he will make a covenant with many for one week: in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifices and oblation to cease;"

Something will happen in the middle of the 70th week that will "do away" with the sacrificial system.

Now let's put the verses relating to the "anointed one" together and read it like a Jew of the time would understand it.

9:25b "unto the anointed one, the prince, shall be seven weeks, and three score and two weeks:"

9:26a "And after the three score and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and have nothing."

9:27a "And he will make a covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifices and oblation to cease;"

Now this makes perfect sense. The writer did not leave his audience guessing as to the meaning of this text. By using the common form of chiastic structure, the writer explicitly communicated to his readers just as he intended.   

All the twisting of meaning and squiming you are doing to beat these pieces into the puzzle so Jesus can be the one is fun to watch.

You know what I think, see post #952 and #951 neither of which you answered.

Also see post #957 where you come up with 1844 CE. See my response in #959 where Joseph Smith is murdered or Polk is elected President.

See posts: #872, #895,  #903, #910, #913, #931, # 946 where I'm clear as to what I think.

2 Annointed ones, Cyrus and Onias.

Daniel 9:25 JPS Hebrew version cited in post #913 - "Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem unto one anointed, a prince, shall be seven weeks;.."

You combine the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks in what you call Dan 9:25 b).

However JPS shows them as 2 different periods. going on as "and for threescore and two weeks, it shall be built again, with broad place and moat, but in troublous times."

Then in v26 JPS - "And after the threescore and two weeks shall an anointed one be cut off, and be no more;" this is anointed one #2 - who is killed namely Onais.

and in the 2nd part - Antiochus shows up - "and the people of a prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; but his end shall be with a flood; and unto the end of the war desolations are determined."

And continues in v27 - "And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week; and for half of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease; and upon the wing of detestable things shall be that which causeth appalment; and that until the extermination wholly determined be poured out upon that which causeth appalment."

See my previous post where I went into detail.

I especially love how you bounce from translation to translation in order to get your mangled puzzle pieces to fit.

 

#951 and #952, You:

Challenge the "poetic form" of Daniel 9:25-27. The proof is in the text. The subjects "alternate" as in "alternating parallels", which is "Common Hebrew Poetic Form". The works of Poe, Whitman, Auden, and others are not poetry because someone says so. They are poetry because of the rhythm and flow of the text. Daniel 9:25-27 in form are "alternating parallels", and form a perfect "chaism" as well. Therefore they are by definition "Hebrew Poetry".

Point out that the temple was already built. Yes, but according to Ezra, Artaxeres is listed as one of the kings involved in this building. His part came later. The text refers to the restoration of Jerusalem which included more than just building the temple structure. Artaxeres was the only one to give permission for the full restoration of the city both physically and politically. I am sure we will never agree on a starting date. Cyrus' date gave permission to rebuild the temple, but lacked the permission for full restoration of the city to it's original standing.

Challenge the "specific requirements" of the prophecy. The prophecy is specific. Our understanding of the events in history and how they relate are in question. There are only maybe 3 or 4 dates that can possibly be considered. This is very limiting. One of these few dates has to match up to the fulfillment. One can not just "pick any date".

The rest of the prophecies in Daniel?? No specifics are given here.

You insist on two anointed ones despite the fact that they go against the literary form of the text. We will never agree on this as long as you insist on reading this from a western point of view.

 

Gramster, on what do you base your insistence that the literary form used in Daniel is more than just a literary form? You seem to be ascribing more meaning to the literary structure than the words in the text.

If there are 3-4 possible dates that can fit a prophecy, is it a prophecy or just a guess?

 

Here is my understanding of your take on Daniel 9:25-27.

1. The "start time" for this prophecy begins with Jeremiah's "prophecy about" the restoration of Jerusalem. This puts it at 586 BC.

2. The time periods are not a poetic way of saying a number, but broken down into separate events.

3. The first seven weeks or 49 years refer to Cyrus 537 BC.

4. The 62 weeks or 434 years which would take us to 152 BC, refers to Onais murder, or possibly Jannaeus'.

5. This also takes us to the covenant made by AE IV which was broken 3 1/2 years later.

6. You claim that the dates not matching is due to the obvious lack of historical knowledge of the 2nd century writer of the book of Daniel.

#1. Shaky at best, but we can let is slide for now.

#2. This is possible according to the text, but does not fit with the Hebrew literary style.

#3. This one fits pretty good.

#4. This one is way off. Onais was slain about 170 BC (18 years off). Jannaeus was slain in 103 BC (49 years off).

#5. The "sacking of Jerusalem by AE IV happened on 167 BC. This is about 15 years off.

#6. There is Zero evidence of historical inaccuracies in the book of Daniel. There are a few unfounded allegations. There are however some pretty amazing bits of historical information a 2nd century BC writer would be very highly unlikely to know.

Belshazzar, being the 2nd ruler in the nation being one.

Asphenaz being the master of the eunuch's is another example. This small detail was disputed until a piece of pottery was found confirming it fairly recently. It is now in the Pergamon Museum in Berlin. This type of detail a 2nd century BC writer would not have known.

Not to mention the fact that most skeptics put the writing of the book of Daniel later than the death of Mattathias, who was quoted from his death bed, as speaking of Daniel as a real person. Interesting that Mattathias would have had the foresight to speak of a character that had not yet been invented?

This looks more like a constellation than a straight line. Most of your points are way off.

jcgadfly wrote:

gramster wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

gramster wrote:

gramster wrote:

gramster wrote:

Daniel 9 verses 25 to 27 need a proper understanding of ancient Hebrew literary structure to be read and understood properly. Here we will need the "Johnny Quest decoder ring". And fortunately we have one on hand.

The overwhelming majority of the Toreh was written in "poetic form". or "Hebrew Parallelism". This is much different than how we do things in English, so we will take a brief look at this.

Daniel 9:25 to 27 forms a "chiastic pattern". I am including the following links so that the reader can 1. know that this is not just a fabrication of Gramps. 2. gain a basic understanding of this principle.

http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/23_parallel.html

Jeff A Benner, a linguist gives a brief introduction to ancient Hebrew poetic parallelism commonly used in the old testament books.

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

Here it is demonstrated how the Book of Daniel is laid out in a double chaismatic formation for the purpose of emphasis.

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

Here historicist Shea has a very simple visual graphic (of Daniel 9: 25 to 27 in particular) that demonstrates very clearly the existing chaistic pattern of the text.

This is a most fascinating principle, and well worth the time and effort to get acquainted with.

In short, the subjects being discussed can be represented by simple letters of the alphabet for demonstration purposes.

The subjects in Daniel 9 under discussion are "Jerusalem", and "The anointed".

The chaistic structure is simply ABCDCBA. Below is the basic structure.

 

A Jerusalem Construction

   B Anointed One

      C Jerusalem Construction

         D Anointed One

      C' Jerusalem Destroyed

   B' Anointed One

A' Jerusalem Destroyed

 

The first subject A will correspond with the last subject A'. The second subject B will correspond with the next to last subject B' etc. Knowing this literary structure is crucial to determining just which subject is being discussed in each text.

We will be exploring this more as we move ahead.

 

Now that we have established Parallelism and chiastic structures as common in ancient Hebrew literature, we will take a closer look at Daniel 9:25-27. I will be using Shea's format for clarity.

A. Jerusalem Construction (Daniel 9:25a) ASV

   "Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem."

       B. Anointed One (Daniel 9:25b)

          "unto the anointed one, the prince, shall be seven weeks, and three score plus 2 weeks:"

              C. Jerusalem Construction (Daniel 9:25c)

                 "It shall be built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times"

                     D. Anointed One (Daniel 9:26a)

                         "And after the three score and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and have nothing"

              C'. Jerusalem Destroyed (Daniel 9:26b)

                  "and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and sanctuary, and the end there of shall be .                  with a flood, and even to the end shall be war, desolation, and destruction."

       B'. Anointed One (Daniel 9:27a)

          "And he will make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the                  sacrifice and oblation to cease;"

A'. Jerusalem Destroyed (Daniel 9:27b)

   "And upon the wing of  abominations shall come one that  makes desolate; one even unto the full end, and that     .   determined, shall wrath be poured out upon the desolate."

What has been established in the links above is that this type of literary structure was not only used, but quite common in the Hebrew writings. It is only rational to believe that a Jewish reader on the time would readily pick up on this, and understand it's ramifications.

As redneF pointed out previously, it is essential for us to understand the various principles and idiosyncrasies of the language being translated. This principle in particular is valuable especially in the interpretation of this text, as without it some confusion exists as to the subjects being discussed.

2 Princes - There are two very distinct princes being discussed here, a "good prince", and a "bad prince". It is important to know which one is being discussed.

C' 9:26b "And the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and sanctuary...

B' 9:27a "And he shall make a covenant with many for one week: ...

Reading this from a "western readers" perspective, this looks like 9:27a is referring to the "bad prince" of 9:26b. But this is not the case. According to the chiasmatic structure, subject B' is related not to C', but to B. That means that 9:27a is referring to the "good prince" of 9:25b.

Putting subject B together with subject B' we get the following.

9:25b "unto the anointed one, the prince shall be seven weeks, and three score and two weeks.

9:27a "And he will make a covenant with many for one week..."

This does not refer to the "bad prince" Antiochus IV in the 2nd century BC. A 2nd century writer would not have written this like way if that were his intentions. Surely his intended audience would have been gravely confused.

This is referring the "good prince", and an anointed one.

Jerusalem Construction and Destruction - Another mistake that reading this text as a "westerner" can lead to, is the assumption that certain parts of this timetable is specifically referring to the construction or destruction of Jerusalem. 

Even thought the construction and destruction of Jerusalem is closely related to the rest of the text, no specific time passage addresses this directly. The events of the construction and destruction of Jerusalem are addressed here, and interrelated to the rest of the text, but no direct time tables are given to these events.

Time References - The time reference given here relates only to the "good prince" in these verses.

A. 9:25a - "... from the going forth of the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem" B. 9:25b "unto the anointed one, the prince, shall be seven weeks, and three score and two weeks:"

This gives us the time table for the arrival of an "anointed one". One may assume that this time table is broken up into specific and differing events. This is not necessarily so. One who is unfamiliar with the phrase "four score and seven years ago", may also assume that the "four score" refers to one event, while the "seven years" refers to another.

These are examples of "word plays". Various word plays were common in the Hebrew, and not uncommon in our language as well.

Since no specific event is tied in this literary structure to this time table except the arrival of an anointed one, it is evident that an anointed one would be expected to arrive after 69 weeks.

The next time reference given is in 9:26a. This is right in the middle of the chiasm, thus giving it special emphasis.

D. 9:26a "And after the three score and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and shall have nothing."

9:25a gives the time table for the "anointed one". 9:26 a gives us a very important event that follows closely.

The next reference to an "anointed one", and the one matching the one referenced in vs 9:25b, is in 9:27a.

"And he will make a covenant with many for one week: in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifices and oblation to cease;"

Something will happen in the middle of the 70th week that will "do away" with the sacrificial system.

Now let's put the verses relating to the "anointed one" together and read it like a Jew of the time would understand it.

9:25b "unto the anointed one, the prince, shall be seven weeks, and three score and two weeks:"

9:26a "And after the three score and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and have nothing."

9:27a "And he will make a covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifices and oblation to cease;"

Now this makes perfect sense. The writer did not leave his audience guessing as to the meaning of this text. By using the common form of chiastic structure, the writer explicitly communicated to his readers just as he intended.   

All the twisting of meaning and squiming you are doing to beat these pieces into the puzzle so Jesus can be the one is fun to watch.

You know what I think, see post #952 and #951 neither of which you answered.

Also see post #957 where you come up with 1844 CE. See my response in #959 where Joseph Smith is murdered or Polk is elected President.

See posts: #872, #895,  #903, #910, #913, #931, # 946 where I'm clear as to what I think.

2 Annointed ones, Cyrus and Onias.

Daniel 9:25 JPS Hebrew version cited in post #913 - "Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem unto one anointed, a prince, shall be seven weeks;.."

You combine the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks in what you call Dan 9:25 b).

However JPS shows them as 2 different periods. going on as "and for threescore and two weeks, it shall be built again, with broad place and moat, but in troublous times."

Then in v26 JPS - "And after the threescore and two weeks shall an anointed one be cut off, and be no more;" this is anointed one #2 - who is killed namely Onais.

and in the 2nd part - Antiochus shows up - "and the people of a prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; but his end shall be with a flood; and unto the end of the war desolations are determined."

And continues in v27 - "And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week; and for half of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease; and upon the wing of detestable things shall be that which causeth appalment; and that until the extermination wholly determined be poured out upon that which causeth appalment."

See my previous post where I went into detail.

I especially love how you bounce from translation to translation in order to get your mangled puzzle pieces to fit.

 

#951 and #952, You:

Challenge the "poetic form" of Daniel 9:25-27. The proof is in the text. The subjects "alternate" as in "alternating parallels", which is "Common Hebrew Poetic Form". The works of Poe, Whitman, Auden, and others are not poetry because someone says so. They are poetry because of the rhythm and flow of the text. Daniel 9:25-27 in form are "alternating parallels", and form a perfect "chaism" as well. Therefore they are by definition "Hebrew Poetry".

Point out that the temple was already built. Yes, but according to Ezra, Artaxeres is listed as one of the kings involved in this building. His part came later. The text refers to the restoration of Jerusalem which included more than just building the temple structure. Artaxeres was the only one to give permission for the full restoration of the city both physically and politically. I am sure we will never agree on a starting date. Cyrus' date gave permission to rebuild the temple, but lacked the permission for full restoration of the city to it's original standing.

Challenge the "specific requirements" of the prophecy. The prophecy is specific. Our understanding of the events in history and how they relate are in question. There are only maybe 3 or 4 dates that can possibly be considered. This is very limiting. One of these few dates has to match up to the fulfillment. One can not just "pick any date".

The rest of the prophecies in Daniel?? No specifics are given here.

You insist on two anointed ones despite the fact that they go against the literary form of the text. We will never agree on this as long as you insist on reading this from a western point of view.

 

Gramster, on what do you base your insistence that the literary form used in Daniel is more than just a literary form? You seem to be ascribing more meaning to the literary structure than the words in the text.

If there are 3-4 possible dates that can fit a prophecy, is it a prophecy or just a guess?

 

Greetings once again.

Here is a link to a website that is not Christian giving a bit more light on the relevance of Hebrew parallelism. Note at the end of the article "Exegetical Importance".

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=67&letters=P&search=parallelism

This link is a long one. I will try it after I post to make sure it goes through.

Chaistic structure is determined by the text. If it follows the ABBA, OR ABCDCBA, OR ABBCBBA, etc, it is a chaism. Daniel 9:24-27 clearly follow that structure. That being ABCDCBA. The subjects being Jerusalem construction, and the anointed one. The exegetical relevance of this is that subject A matches subject A, B matches B, C matches C, etc. Since D is alternating in sync with B would match B as an alternating parallel.

This is not Gramps. Study the links. A Hebrew writer would never throw this out of balance. The intended reader would be quite confused.

As to the 3 or 4 dates. This can hardly be a guess. The odds of the fulfillment of this prophecy falling on one of even 20 specific dates are astronomical. When the fulfillment happens, and one goes back to confirm the prophecy odds are that there would be no event that would even come close to matching.

The prophecy is specific enough. From a word or command...to the coming of a messiah (anointed one) will be 69 weeks, or 483 years. From the only one that gives permission to properly restore Jerusalem to it's original standing politically in 457 BC, that brings us down to 27 AD. Exactly.

The odds of this "just landing" on this date by chance are astronomical.

The Hebrew literary structure fits perfectly, The time fits perfectly, there is no need to wiggle around and make excuses for dates not fitting. Just prophecy fulfilled. But you can't except that.

"There is no God, so it can't be prophecy". That is your philosophy, and only real argument. That is why Hebrew poetry and literary structure "must not have significance" to you.

 

 

 

 

 

gramster wrote:

#951 and #952, You:

Challenge the "poetic form" of Daniel 9:25-27. The proof is in the text. The subjects "alternate" as in "alternating parallels", which is "Common Hebrew Poetic Form". The works of Poe, Whitman, Auden, and others are not poetry because someone says so. They are poetry because of the rhythm and flow of the text. Daniel 9:25-27 in form are "alternating parallels", and form a perfect "chaism" as well. Therefore they are by definition "Hebrew Poetry".

[quote-PJTS]

Did I? What I challenged was your link which you claimed substantiated that Daniel was poetic form. It specifically does not mention Daniel.

See your link again - http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/23_parallel.html

What I said:

PJTS #951 wrote:

So? The site you mention does not specify that Daniel is poetry, I'm aware a lot of the Hebrew Bible is poetry, but right now we aren't discussing Psalms, Proverbs or Genesis. A whole lot of it is also allegory and story-telling aka parables. One of the purposes of the scriptures to a Jew was examples of how to lead a life of which the god would approve.

 

So did I say Daniel was not poetry? No, I said your link does not say it is

Point out that the temple was already built. Yes, but according to Ezra, Artaxeres is listed as one of the kings involved in this building. His part came later. The text refers to the restoration of Jerusalem which included more than just building the temple structure. Artaxeres was the only one to give permission for the full restoration of the city both physically and politically. I am sure we will never agree on a starting date. Cyrus' date gave permission to rebuild the temple, but lacked the permission for full restoration of the city to it's original standing.

I gave you 3 different pieces of information that make the claim that Cyrus allowed the Jews to return as well as others that Babylon had displaced.

1- The Cyrus Cylinder - "I returned the images of the gods, who had resided there [i.e., in Babylon], to their places and I let them dwell in eternal abodes. I gathered all their inhabitants and returned to them their dwellings." - http://www.livius.org/ct-cz/cyrus_I/cyrus_cylinder2.html

What is it you think " I gathered all their inhabitants and returned to them their dwellings" means exactly?

Apparently Josephus thought it meant the Jews returned and rebuilt the Temple and returned to their city.

As -

2- "Thus saith Cyrus the king: Since God Almighty hath appointed me to be king of the habitable earth, I believe that he is that God which the nation of the Israelites worship; for indeed he foretold my name by the prophets, and that I should build him a house at Jerusalem, in the country of Judea." - from - http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-11.htm

Here we have Cyrus as the one foretold supposedly and the claim he ordered the Temple to be rebuilt.

Then we have:

3- "That saith of Cyrus: 'He is My shepherd, and shall perform all My pleasure'; even saying of Jerusalem: 'She shall be built'; and to the temple: 'My foundation shall be laid." - from 2nd Isaiah - written around the time of Cyrus we have this in Isaiah 44:28 written circa time of Cyrus.

Here we have the claim he ordered Jerusalem to be built as well as the Temple.

Challenge the "specific requirements" of the prophecy. The prophecy is specific. Our understanding of the events in history and how they relate are in question. There are only maybe 3 or 4 dates that can possibly be considered. This is very limiting. One of these few dates has to match up to the fulfillment. One can not just "pick any date".

 

The rest of the prophecies in Daniel?? No specifics are given here.

You insist on two anointed ones despite the fact that they go against the literary form of the text. We will never agree on this as long as you insist on reading this from a western point of view.

 

You insist on ignoring that the originators of the God beliefs the Jews see 2 anointed ones and beat in your morphed beliefs derived from the original Yahweh believers to fit Jesus in as the only anointed one.

Are you saying that the originators the Jews read this from a western viewpoint? Even your links show they see 2 "anointed ones" not one.