Prophecy

Author: disgusted ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 75
  • disgusted
    disgusted avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,959
    2
    3
    3
    disgusted avatar
    disgusted
    How does 70 weeks stack up for accuracy?(dan)
  • disgusted
    disgusted avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,959
    2
    3
    3
    disgusted avatar
    disgusted
    --> @PGA2.0
    Golfer, where are you?
  • PGA2.0
    PGA2.0 avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 2,344
    3
    3
    7
    PGA2.0 avatar
    PGA2.0
    --> @disgusted


    How does 70 weeks stack up for accuracy?(dan)
    There have been a number of ways of looking at the seventy weeks.

    Philip Mauro (https://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/1921_mauro_seventy-weeks.html) believed the dating system based on Ptolemy was all screwed up and out of whack by 82 years.  He used Martin Anstey's chronology which was based on the Bible alone to demonstrate this. Anstey said, "The true date of the 1st year of Cyrus is, therefore, B.C. 454, not B.C. 536"

    According to Martin Anstey, 

    Persian Empire (Cyrus to Alexander the Great) 123 years (Daniel), 205 years (Ptolemy).
    Greek Empire (Alexander the Great to AD 1) 331 years (Daniel), 331 years (Ptolemy).
    TOTAL 454 years (Daniel), 536 years (Ptolemy).
    AD1 to the Crucifixion, AD30 29 years (Daniel), 29 years (Ptolemy).
    TOTAL 483 years (Daniel), 565 years (Ptolemy).

    But the true point of departure for the 70 weeks, and therefore for the 483 years also, is unquestionably the 1st year of Cyrus (Dan. 9, 2 Chron. 36:20–23, Ezra 1:1–4, Isa. 44:28, 45:1–4, 13), and no other epoch would ever have been suggested but for the fact that the count of the years was lost, and wrongly restored from Ptolemy’s conjectural astronomical calculations. It would be far better to abandon the Ptolemaic Chronology and fit the events into the 483 years of the Hebrew prophecy.

    I think the prophetic timetable can be demonstrated to apply to Jesus with this time frame. Also, the 40 years in judgment in the desert before Israel entered the Promised Land, led by Moses, is a type and shadow of the 40 years God gives these OT people in warning of the judgment of not entering that land unless they repented and believed.


    ***


    Don. K. Preston believes that the seventy weeks are not exact but the starting point was Cyrus' decree to rebuild the temple and the endpoint the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. We know from Daniel 9:24-27 that the timeline includes the issuing of the decree to rebuild the city and temple once more and then another destruction after the Messiah is killed. We know from Daniel 9:24 that six specific issues would be fulfilled.

    1. Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression,
    2. To make an end of sin, 
    3. To make atonement for iniquity,
    4. To bring in everlasting righteousness,
    5. To seal up vision and prophecy,
    6. To anoint the most holy place.

    All six prophecies can most definitely be demonstrated to have been fulfilled in Jesus Christ. 

    1. God gave Israel, the Old Covenant people, a specific period of time to finish their transgression against Him. They had already answered for their seeking of false gods by the destruction of the city and temple by Babylon. This would happen again to finish the transgression. It would be a complete judgment where the curses of Deuteronomy 28 would take place.

    2. With the destruction of the temple, the provision required to atone for sin, as prescribed by OT was no longer possible after AD 70 for the very reason that Jesus Christ had provided a once for all sacrifice for sin that met God's righteous standards (Hebrews 9:13-14). The OT provision obviously cannot be met as stated in the OT (Exodus 24:3, 7) and agreed to by the covenant people after AD 70.

    3. With Christ's sacrifice, a new and better atonement for the iniquity of God's people was given.

    4. The life of Jesus Christ was a righteous life without sin that satisfied God's righteous requirements, as stated over and over in the NT.

    5. The end or sealing up of prophecy and vision would have all taken place by AD 70. 

    6. The holiest place would be anointed in heaven, per Daniel 7:13-14. The Son of Man would sit on the throne God promised King David. 


  • disgusted
    disgusted avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,959
    2
    3
    3
    disgusted avatar
    disgusted
    --> @PGA2.0
    Yeah but 70 weeks is 70 weeks if your are claiming prophesy fulfillment. It seems that you and your theological liars have produced a completely fabricated post hoc prophesy that you then claim was fulfilled.
    70 weeks is 70 weeks, that prophesy failed abysmally and down with it goes your much vaunted veracity of prophesy.
    Bad luck.
    The prophesy says 70 weeks
  • keithprosser
    keithprosser avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 3,289
    2
    3
    3
    keithprosser avatar
    keithprosser
    --> @disgusted
    It's my view that because the early Christians wanted to connect their new religion with traditional judaism they re-interpreted the role of prophesy. 

    The OT prophets were not in the business of predicting the far future; they commented on their present time and the immediate consequences of what was happening right then, particuarly if what was happening was apostasy!   The idea that prophesy is concerned with events hundreds of years ahead relies on very shakey parallels and disregrard for context and an unforced, natural reading of the prophetic books reveals their concern was for the present, not a half mllennium hence.

    Daniel is a special case.  I will not defend the late dating of Daniel but I accept the consensus it was written after not before most of the events it purports to predict.  The reasoning behind the composition of Daniel was that its seeming accuracy about the past would give it credibility when it moved to predicting the future (past and future being relative to its time of writing).

    To understand Daniel it is necessary to study the situation in Palestine when it was written, because that is why it was written.  It wasn't written in Babylon about events 600 years in its future.  It was written in Palestine in 2ndC BCE about events there and then.

    However - don't take my word for it!  If you're interested start googling.



     



      

  • PGA2.0
    PGA2.0 avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 2,344
    3
    3
    7
    PGA2.0 avatar
    PGA2.0
    --> @disgusted

    Yeah but 70 weeks is 70 weeks if your are claiming prophesy fulfillment. It seems that you and your theological liars have produced a completely fabricated post hoc prophesy that you then claim was fulfilled.
    Yeah, but...

    So where do you propose the 70 weeks of years fail?

    70 weeks is 70 weeks, that prophesy failed abysmally and down with it goes your much vaunted veracity of prophesy.
    Not necessarily, because many numbers are rounded out in the Bible. For instance, one thousand can be shown to be figurative language such as, “For every beast of the forest is Mine, The cattle on a thousand hills.

    If God owns every beast then He owns cattle on more than a thousand hills, even on one thousand and one or one million and one. Thus, the language is figurative and was commonly used to express large numbers. 

    That is the point I made when I cited Don K. Preston's idea of prophecy.

    Even so, I have laid out that Philip Mauro has explained the 490 years adequately in his book. The dating system is based on Ptolemy's dating and astronomical signs which are highly suspicious.

    An attempt has been made to call Astronomy to the aid of the defective Chronology of Ptolemy, by utilizing certain incidental references, contained in fragmentary historical records, to eclipses of the sun or moon...For example, one of the clearest of these historical references is that of the "Eclipse of Thales," mentioned by Herodotous. This eclipse is located by one astronomer as occurring in 625 B. C.; by another as late as 585 B. C. (a difference of 40 years); and by others at different dates in between (Anstey, p. 286).



    Bad luck.
    The prophesy says 70 weeks



  • PGA2.0
    PGA2.0 avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 2,344
    3
    3
    7
    PGA2.0 avatar
    PGA2.0
    --> @keithprosser

    It's my view that because the early Christians wanted to connect their new religion with traditional judaism they re-interpreted the role of prophesy.  
    The first Christians were Jewish. 


    The OT prophets were not in the business of predicting the far future; they commented on their present time and the immediate consequences of what was happening right then, particuarly if what was happening was apostasy!   The idea that prophesy is concerned with events hundreds of years ahead relies on very shakey parallels and disregrard for context and an unforced, natural reading of the prophetic books reveals their concern was for the present, not a half mllennium hence.
    That is not accurate. Daniels prophecy is for a time far in the future and the OT sometimes makes the distinction by stating it was for the "latter" times. Prophecies like Daniel 9:24-27 also places the time of judgment when the city and temple are once again destroyed. Since they have not yet been built yet, and the decree comes decades later, this prophecy is for hundreds of years in the future.

    He said, “Go your way, Daniel, for these words are concealed and sealed up until the end time...13 But as for you, go your way to the end; then you will enter into rest and rise again for your allotted portion at the end of the age.”


    When you are in distress and all these things have come upon you, in the latter days you will return to the Lord your God and listen to His voice.

    After many days you will be summoned; in the latter years you will come into the land that is restored from the sword, whose inhabitants have been gathered from many nations to the mountains of Israel which had been a continual waste; but its people were brought out from the nations, and they are living securely, all of them.

    However, there is a God in heaven who reveals mysteries, and He has made known to King Nebuchadnezzar what will take place in the latter days. This was your dream and the visions in your mind while on your bed.

    [ Peaceful Latter Days ] And it will come about in the last days That the mountain of the house of the LordWill be established as the chief of the mountains. It will be raised above the hills, And the peoples will stream to it.


    Daniel is a special case.  I will not defend the late dating of Daniel but I accept the consensus it was written after not before most of the events it purports to predict.  The reasoning behind the composition of Daniel was that its seeming accuracy about the past would give it credibility when it moved to predicting the future (past and future being relative to its time of writing).

    To understand Daniel it is necessary to study the situation in Palestine when it was written, because that is why it was written.  It wasn't written in Babylon about events 600 years in its future.  It was written in Palestine in 2ndC BCE about events there and then.
    Based on what? The Dead Sea Scrolls contain a copy of Daniel that is traced back to 200BCE which means it is earlier than that. Then you have to reconcile other prophets that mention Daniel and his time that are dated earlier.

    Dead Sea Scrolls discovered outside of the Qumran caves range from as early as the First Temple period (eighth century bce) to as late as the 11th century ce. Collections include the fourth-century bce Samaritan Aramaic papyri from Wadi Daliyeh and the Arabic manuscripts from Khirbet Mird (7th–8th centuries ce).



    A reconstruction of 4QDanc., the oldest manuscript of the book of Daniel (second half of the second century BC)...Since there is a manuscript of Daniel that supposedly dates within 50 years of the autograph, is there enough time for the supposed traditio-historical and redaction-critical developments allegedly needed for the growth of the book? Supporters of the Maccabean dating hypothesis of Daniel will be hard put to explain all of this in their reconstructions. To express it differently, do the early dates of the fragments from Cave 4 leave enough room for the developments, editorial and redactional as well as others, that are so often proposed (e.g., Koch 1986:20–24)? The verdict seems to be negative, and an earlier date for Daniel than the second century is unavoidable.

    However - don't take my word for it!  If you're interested start googling. 

    I do not. 
  • disgusted
    disgusted avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,959
    2
    3
    3
    disgusted avatar
    disgusted
    --> @PGA2.0
    490 years
    There is no 490yrs mentioned in the prophesy.

    24 Seventy weeks are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city, [j]to finish [k]transgression, and [l]to make an end of sins, and to [m]make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and [n]prophecy, and to anoint [o]the most holy. 25 Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto [p]the anointed one, the prince, shall be [q]seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: it shall be built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times. 26 And after the threescore and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and [r]shall have nothing: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and even unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined. 27 And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the [s]oblation to cease; and [t]upon the wing of abominations shall come one that maketh desolate; and even unto the full end, and that determined, shall wrath be poured out upon the desolate.
    70 weeks.
    Daniels prophecy is for a time far in the future
    A whole year and a half into the far future.
  • keithprosser
    keithprosser avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 3,289
    2
    3
    3
    keithprosser avatar
    keithprosser
    --> @PGA2.0
    I'd hope that anyone who does spend a few hours googling will see what i posted is not the view of a few fanatical anti-religionists but a precis of mainstream scholarship  - I consider myself boringly conventional!

    I suppose it all hinges on when Daniel was composed.   
  • PGA2.0
    PGA2.0 avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 2,344
    3
    3
    7
    PGA2.0 avatar
    PGA2.0
    --> @disgusted
    490 years
    There is no 490yrs mentioned in the prophesy.
    Again, it shows that you don't understand prophecy. Even Jewish sites recognize the 70 years as 70X7=490 years, per Leviticus 26:18. 

    To look further into the 70 week judgment period toward Israel, notice the number of years that the full 70 weeks amount up to: 490 years. That number might not seem significant unless you take into account the 7 times rule promised in the Torah of Moses that Daniel had just acknowledge they had broken. "And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins." - Leviticus 26:18
    God had already hit Israel with a 70 years period of judgment as Jeremiah prophesied concerning Babylon (Jeremiah. 29:10). But because Israel did not hearken unto their God, He did as He promised in Leviticus 26:18, and issued a period of judgment of "seven times more" the seventy years prophesied by Jeremiah (70 x 7 = 490 years).



    24 Seventy weeks are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city, [j]to finish [k]transgression, and [l]to make an end of sins, and to [m]make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and [n]prophecy, and to anoint [o]the most holy. 25 Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto [p]the anointed one, the prince, shall be [q]seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: it shall be built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times. 26 And after the threescore and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and [r]shall have nothing: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and even unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined. 27 And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the [s]oblation to cease; and [t]upon the wing of abominations shall come one that maketh desolate; and even unto the full end, and that determined, shall wrath be poured out upon the desolate.
    70 weeks.
    See above and below.

    Daniels prophecy is for a time far in the future
    A whole year and a half into the far future.






    Daniel's Seventy Weeks has been completely fulfilled! It was fulfilled in 70 CE at the destruction of the second temple as indicated in verses 26 and 27. Therefore, Daniel Seventy Weeks covers 490 years from the destruction of the first temple to the destruction of the second. For it is only after the completion of the Seventy Weeks that complete redemption of Israel can come about. This is why the Talmud states that on the day of the destruction of the second temple, the messiah was born. They were not looking for the messiah and the End of Days to come during the Seventy Weeks of Daniel, only after...

    What the Seventy Weeks of Daniel did was, lay a foundation for the great messianic age (olam haba) to come that will give rise to an everlasting temple. Remember, Daniel's temple was doomed from its beginning, it was only given 490 years to be in existence according to prophecy. Ezekiel's temple however, is prophesied to last throughout the ages (see Ezekiel 37:26-28).
    .


    So, the Messianic period/Messianic kingdom would begin in AD 70. We, as Preterists believe that Ezekiel's temple is a spiritual temple, as the NT teaches. 
  • PGA2.0
    PGA2.0 avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 2,344
    3
    3
    7
    PGA2.0 avatar
    PGA2.0
    --> @keithprosser

    I'd hope that anyone who does spend a few hours googling will see what i posted is not the view of a few fanatical anti-religionists but a precis of mainstream scholarship  - I consider myself boringly conventional!

    I suppose it all hinges on when Daniel was composed. 
    Since you give that Daniel was composed before the destruction of the temple, some 200 or so years before, the temple and city are still prophesied to be rebuilt and destroyed once again. We know that the Babylonians destroyed the first temple. The only other time a Jewish temple has been destroyed is AD 70. Thus, whether you want to look at the prophecy from a figurative/spiritual or literal timeframe the prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70. 

    What "scholarship" are you referencing? 

  • keithprosser
    keithprosser avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 3,289
    2
    3
    3
    keithprosser avatar
    keithprosser
    --> @PGA2.0
    What "scholarship" are you referencing? 

    The scholarship (witout quotes) that interprets Daniel in terms of conditions in the C2 BCE. 

    That scolarship identifies the messiah in 9:26 as Onias III and the 'destruction' as the desecration of the temple in 168 BC.

    I confess I am not familir with the Ezekiel references - i will remedy that forthwith!
     

  • PGA2.0
    PGA2.0 avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 2,344
    3
    3
    7
    PGA2.0 avatar
    PGA2.0
    --> @keithprosser
    What "scholarship" are you referencing? 

    The scholarship (witout quotes) that interprets Daniel in terms of conditions in the C2 BCE.  
    What does this mean?


    That scolarship identifies the messiah in 9:26 as Onias III and the 'destruction' as the desecration of the temple in 168 BC.
    And why do you think the prophecy is referring to Onias III? 

    PS. The temple was not destroyed in 168BC. 


    I confess I am not familir with the Ezekiel references - i will remedy that forthwith! 
      


  • keithprosser
    keithprosser avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 3,289
    2
    3
    3
    keithprosser avatar
    keithprosser
    --> @PGA2.0
    PS. The temple was not destroyed in 168BC. 
    pps - the text doesn't say it was destroyed - it implies desecrated.

    Dan 9:27
    ...And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation

    The principle sources are Josephus Antiquities of the Jews and 1 Maccabbees:

    1:57 On the fifteenth day of the month Casleu, in the hundred and forty-fifth year, king Antiochus set up the abominable idol of desolation upon the altar of God, and they built altars throughout all the cities of Juda round about:


  • PGA2.0
    PGA2.0 avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 2,344
    3
    3
    7
    PGA2.0 avatar
    PGA2.0
    --> @keithprosser

    PS. The temple was not destroyed in 168BC. 
    pps - the text doesn't say it was destroyed - it implies desecrated.

    Dan 9:27
    ...And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation

    The principle sources are Josephus Antiquities of the Jews and 1 Maccabbees:

    1:57 On the fifteenth day of the month Casleu, in the hundred and forty-fifth year, king Antiochus set up the abominable idol of desolation upon the altar of God, and they built altars throughout all the cities of Juda round about:

    Regarding Josephus:

    Josephus mentions that Daniel’s prophecy regarding Alexander the Great were shown to the Greek general as he came toward Jerusalem in the 4th century BC, and that the illustrious commander was so impressed that he spared the holy city (Antiquities Xl, VIII, 3-5). The truth of this story is disputed, but it highlights Josephus’s view and therefore the Jewish view at the time, namely that Daniel was the author of the work and that it was completed long before the time of Alexander (332 BC), and therefore long before the Maccabees. Living much closer to the Maccabean era than us, Josephus knows nothing of a Maccabean origin for Daniel or any alternative author than the biblical Daniel.




    Antiquities Xl, VIII, 5
    "And when the Book of Daniel was showed him wherein Daniel declared that one of the Greeks should destroy the empire of the Persians, he supposed that himself was the person intended."

    Josephus also wrote that no books were added to the Old Testament after the time of the Persian ruler Artaxerxes (464-424 B.C.) (Josephus,Against Apion 1.8).


    "It is true, our history hath been written since Artaxerxes very particularly, but hath not been esteemed of the like authority with the former by our forefathers, because there hath not been an exact succession of prophets since that time; and how firmly we have given credit to these books of our own nation is evident by what we do;"


    Josephus interpreted the desolation of the temple by Antiochus IV Epiphanes as the fulfillment of prophecies made by Daniel “according to Daniel’s vision and what he wrote many years before they came to pass” (Antiquities X.Xl.7).

    ***

    26 Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined. 27 And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”



    ***

    Also,

    The scholarship (witout quotes) that interprets Daniel in terms of conditions in the C2 BCE.  
    What does this mean? Should it read: "The scholarship (without quotes) that interprets Daniel in terms of conditions in the 2nd century BCE?"
    What does without quotes mean? Does it mean that you don't know who the scholars are?

  • keithprosser
    keithprosser avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 3,289
    2
    3
    3
    keithprosser avatar
    keithprosser
    If the consensus was not that Daniel is late those sites wouldn't exist!

    My searches so far have not revealed why the Alexander story is discounted, which is embarassing!  But you'd only reject it anyway.   But it is important and interesting so I will add it to my bucket list of research topics.


  • disgusted
    disgusted avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,959
    2
    3
    3
    disgusted avatar
    disgusted
    --> @PGA2.0
    The prophesy of Daniel

    24 Seventy weeks are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city, [j]to finish [k]transgression, and [l]to make an end of sins, and to [m]make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and [n]prophecy, and to anoint [o]the most holy. 25 Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto [p]the anointed one, the prince, shall be [q]seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: it shall be built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times. 26 And after the threescore and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and [r]shall have nothing: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and even unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined. 27 And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the [s]oblation to cease; and [t]upon the wing of abominations shall come one that maketh desolate; and even unto the full end, and that determined, shall wrath be poured out upon the desolate.
    Where is seven times written? And if a day is a thousand years why isn't it 490,000yrs predicted?
  • 3RU7AL
    3RU7AL avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 5,440
    2
    3
    7
    3RU7AL avatar
    3RU7AL
    --> @disgusted
    A lot of people seem to get caught up in the claims that the Jesus was a really real, real actual flesh and blood human being, and "the flood" was a (pre)historical event and Daniel predicted some stuff.

    I'm simply trying to point out that all of these are just a basket of red herrings.

    And trying to argue about any of them is the epistemological equivalent of rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic.

    And even "the gospels" that you highlighted, if taken as historically authentic, they are, at most, accurate accounts of what the authors themselves believed to be true at the time.  The Jesus said, "this and that and some other thing" and sure, maybe that person existed and maybe they even said that stuff, but that doesn't make any supernatural claims any more likely to be true than if someone said that same stuff today.

    All of the "authentication" claims that supposedly fit the Jewish and Christian writings also apply equally well to the Epic of Gilgamesh.

    And the Epic of Gilgamesh is significantly older and better authenticated.  The earliest tablets that record the Epic of Gilgamesh are estimated to be from about 3000 BCE.  The oldest surviving record of the Jewish stories are from about 300 BCE.

    Christians seem to understand that the Epic of Gilgamesh is older than both Judaism and Christianity and that Gilgamesh himself was very likely a historical king.  And it seems like it would be difficult for them to deny the accounts that "the first man was made of mud" and "the gods sent a great flood because the humans displeased them" and "one of the gods decided to warn one of their followers about the flood before it happened" without being incredulous about those same exact stories written in their own special books.

    But even then, a Christian has the impulse to believe that even if some of that stuff is true, that doesn't mean the ancient Sumerian gods were "real".

    And so, any Jewish or Christian arguments attempting to claim "historical accuracy" of their ancient texts are absolutely and utterly moot.
  • PGA2.0
    PGA2.0 avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 2,344
    3
    3
    7
    PGA2.0 avatar
    PGA2.0
    --> @disgusted


    The prophesy of Daniel

    24 Seventy weeks are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city, [j]to finish [k]transgression, and [l]to make an end of sins, and to [m]make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and [n]prophecy, and to anoint [o]the most holy. 25 Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto [p]the anointed one, the prince, shall be [q]seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: it shall be built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times. 26 And after the threescore and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and [r]shall have nothing: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and even unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined. 27 And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the [s]oblation to cease; and [t]upon the wing of abominations shall come one that maketh desolate; and even unto the full end, and that determined, shall wrath be poured out upon the desolate.
    Where is seven times written? And if a day is a thousand years why isn't it 490,000yrs predicted?

    Seven or seventy? 

    Again, the concept of a multiple of seventy comes from Leviticus 26:18,

    Leviticus 26:18 (NASB)
    18 If also after these things you do not obey Me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins.


    God had already hit Israel with a 70 years period of judgment as Jeremiah prophesied concerning Babylon (Jeremiah. 29:10). But because Israel did not hearken unto their God, He did as He promised in Leviticus 26:18, and issued a period of judgment of "seven times more" the seventy years prophesied by Jeremiah (70 x 7 = 490 years).

  • PGA2.0
    PGA2.0 avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 2,344
    3
    3
    7
    PGA2.0 avatar
    PGA2.0
    --> @keithprosser
    Hi Keith, I'm not sure who you are addressing with this post since I did not receive a notification? 

    If the consensus was not that Daniel is late those sites wouldn't exist!
    We all have a bias, that is why it is interesting to look at what and who influences people. I make a practice of doing that since I understand there is no neutrality. Ideas have consequences. Where you start is so often where you end up.


    My searches so far have not revealed why the Alexander story is discounted, which is embarassing!  But you'd only reject it anyway.   But it is important and interesting so I will add it to my bucket list of research topics.


    I have studied worldviews for perhaps thirty years (hard to say exactly when I became interested in that topic). Give me your scholars and I will examine their worldview. Liberal scholarship usually is the underlying issue. Since the 17th century, with German Higher Criticism (not that it or higher criticism is all bad of course) there has been an effort to look at the Bible as a human construct by many. Thus, the paradigm has changed. A big factor in the change was the Enlightenment (humanism) and Age of Reason (rationalism), along with Darwinism (evolution) that gave humans the idea that they were the measure of all things. 

    Once the Bible is looked at as human constructs (anti-supernaturalists) miracles and God are exchanged for solely manmade explanations by many. It is as simple as that. That ideology is imported into studying the text. Thus when God says without faith it is impossible to please Him because those who come to Him must believe He exists and rewards those who diligently seek Him, these German higher critics adopted a humanistic approach to the Bible that soon undermined the Bible. Thus, they started to doubt the signature of God on the Bible. 

    The historical-critical method assumes the autonomy of the human scientist from the Bible as the word of God. It assumes that one must start with the secular world as a norm for determining meaning and for deciding what has happened in the past. This method does not accept at face value the Bible as the Word of God. It would be unscientific and unhistorical to do so. Rather its claim to be the word of God and its statements claiming to report history (and finally its statements about theology) must be verified and accepted as one would accept a statement from the documents of any other ancient national people. Such a conception implies that the Bible has come about in the same manner as has any other piece of literature.


    So, you and I look at the Bible, history, everything, from two different approaches and we look for our explanations with that supposition in mind. That is not to say that Christians do not examine evidence, we do. We interpret it differently than you do. We believe the evidence has its explanation in God since God is the maker of facts. You believe it has its explanation in your own thinking and the thinking of your experts about the past that confirm your worldview bias. You look at the evidence and discount what goes against your naturalistic point of view.  

    Some of the men who have been most distinguished as the leaders of the Higher Critical movement in Germany and Holland have been men who have no faith in the God of the Bible, and no faith in either the necessity or the possibility of a personal supernatural revelation. The men who have been the voices of the movement, of whom the great majority, less widely known and less influential, have been mere echoes; the men who manufactured the articles the others distributed, have been notoriously opposed to the miraculous...

    Thus, the view developed that miracles were myth and legend and that prophecy was written into the text after the fact which led to the view held to this today regarding the Bible as a mythical book written solely by men.

    Of the big names in the movement, some think Spinoza was the influence that set the ball rolling, and Eichhorn (the first to use the term "higher criticism") the first of the German higher critics. Then men like Friedrich Schleiermacher and Ludwig Feuerbach had a big influence on the movement.

  • keithprosser
    keithprosser avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 3,289
    2
    3
    3
    keithprosser avatar
    keithprosser
    A masterly precis, PGA. 
    So how do you respond to the charge that few people object to the techniques of higher criticism when they applied to other scriptures?
  • PGA2.0
    PGA2.0 avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 2,344
    3
    3
    7
    PGA2.0 avatar
    PGA2.0
    --> @keithprosser
    A masterly precis, PGA.  
    So how do you respond to the charge that few people object to the techniques of higher criticism when they applied to other scriptures?

    It would be foolish to object to all higher criticism. There are many, many truths there. I object to the fundamental starting premises much of the movement works on that miracles and anything supernatural is automatically dismissed in finding an explanation. IOW's, they dismiss the Bible can be God's revelation which eventually leads to reducing everything to man-made myths, a god of sheepherders, and to many the thought of Jesus as a myth or legend, not relevant to today.

  • PGA2.0
    PGA2.0 avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 2,344
    3
    3
    7
    PGA2.0 avatar
    PGA2.0
    --> @3RU7AL
    A lot of people seem to get caught up in the claims that the Jesus was a really real, real actual flesh and blood human being, and "the flood" was a (pre)historical event and Daniel predicted some stuff.
    You have left a lot to unpack. 

    When you say "A lot of people seem to get caught up in the claims that the Jesus was a really real, real actual flesh and blood human being" while this is true a lot also get caught up in the claims that He was not. So, what is reasonable to believe regarding the historical facts and data available? I would argue you choose to believe the less credible.

    The Flood is a question for another time since it opens up another can of worms that is heavily disputed. 

    The first scenario has some merit to it for it is workable. 

    1. The 490 years are based on Leviticus 26:18.
    2. Numbers 14:34 states a specific period of 40 years and alludes back to the 40 years spent in the desert where the whole generation perished except for a few, Joshua and Caleb and their families who believed God. Jesus also issued a period of forty years just before His death when He warned that generation. So from His crucifixion onwards, the period ticks down to AD 70 when the Old Covenant disappears. There are two facts main here that you cannot argue against, one that the city was destroyed, and two, that the Mosaic covenant God made with Israel regarding atonement and sin can no longer be met as specified in the Law. 

    There is another scenario that works if you want to apply the years literally to 490 years exactly. That is the one proposed by Philip Mauro in which he claimed, per Martin Anstey's chronology as opposed to Ptolemy's. I listed that one above. 

    But, if you take the 490 years, not as a precise and literal number, then you have a third scenario that fits the prophecy.

    The period of 1260, 1290, and 1334 days can also be shown to fit the first-century very convincingly.  

  • PGA2.0
    PGA2.0 avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 2,344
    3
    3
    7
    PGA2.0 avatar
    PGA2.0
    --> @3RU7AL

    And trying to argue about any of them is the epistemological equivalent of rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic.
    I'm willing to do that if you want to supply the counter argument? 


    And even "the gospels" that you highlighted, if taken as historically authentic, they are, at most, accurate accounts of what the authors themselves believed to be true at the time.  The Jesus said, "this and that and some other thing" and sure, maybe that person existed and maybe they even said that stuff, but that doesn't make any supernatural claims any more likely to be true than if someone said that same stuff today.
    And what do you have from the early historical record that counter them? 


    All of the "authentication" claims that supposedly fit the Jewish and Christian writings also apply equally well to the Epic of Gilgamesh.

    And the Epic of Gilgamesh is significantly older and better authenticated.  The earliest tablets that record the Epic of Gilgamesh are estimated to be from about 3000 BCE.  The oldest surviving record of the Jewish stories are from about 300 BCE.
    The question is which borrowed from the other since Moses states that the written genealogical records were handed down and he compiled them into the Torah. 


    Christians seem to understand that the Epic of Gilgamesh is older than both Judaism and Christianity and that Gilgamesh himself was very likely a historical king.  And it seems like it would be difficult for them to deny the accounts that "the first man was made of mud" and "the gods sent a great flood because the humans displeased them" and "one of the gods decided to warn one of their followers about the flood before it happened" without being incredulous about those same exact stories written in their own special books.

    But even then, a Christian has the impulse to believe that even if some of that stuff is true, that doesn't mean the ancient Sumerian gods were "real".
    Some Christians act on impulse, others have investigated the evidence and data. And the non-Christian has the impulse to believe that some of the biblical accounts are untrue. 


    And so, any Jewish or Christian arguments attempting to claim "historical accuracy" of their ancient texts are absolutely and utterly moot. 

    No, they are not. It is reasonable and logical evidence.
  • disgusted
    disgusted avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,959
    2
    3
    3
    disgusted avatar
    disgusted
    --> @PGA2.0
    Even Jewish sites recognize the 70 years as 70X7=490 years
    There are no 70yrs mentioned in the prophesy, it mentions 70 weeks and is therefore a failed prophesy. There is no Leviticus mentioned in the prophesy. Once again here is the prophesy:


    24 Seventy weeks are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city, [j]to finish [k]transgression, and [l]to make an end of sins, and to [m]make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and [n]prophecy, and to anoint [o]the most holy. 25 Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto [p]the anointed one, the prince, shall be [q]seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: it shall be built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times. 26 And after the threescore and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and [r]shall have nothing: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and even unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined. 27 And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the [s]oblation to cease; and [t]upon the wing of abominations shall come one that maketh desolate; and even unto the full end, and that determined, shall wrath be poured out upon the desolate.
    If you need to change anything about that then you prove the prophesy false.