by bohm 27 Replies latest watchtower bible
bohm: good you have found the page which probably best deals with your specific question; too bad the alternative "Messianic" interpretation offered at the end is not really better...
Just found this thread which might be of interest: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/154817/1/When-was-Daniels-70-Weeks-first-applied-to-Jesus
Here is a useful essay written by Carl Olof Jonsson on the subject of 455 BC:
http://user.tninet.se/~oof408u/fkf/english/artaxerxes.htm
And to concur with Narkissos, the Society's chronographical scheme draws on a long history of Christian interpretation (and translation) but it doesn't make very good sense of what is actually written in Daniel. This is not a subject however that could be easily explained without going into matters of translation, literary context, and early Jewish history.
Daniel 9:25? Oh, what cans of worms are opened! And each worm in each can is defended and promoted with a passion. In the end, they show us the futility of having a faith that relies on dates and on chronologies.
In the context of this passage, Daniel’s obsession is with the current state of his beloved temple in Jerusalem. He has been studying some manner of writing from Jeremiah, and in doing so, Daniel recognises that with the downfall of Babylon, God’s declaration regarding her 70 years of domination has come to an end. But nothing has happened in regards to the people returning or the temple being restored. Then he recognises that the promised return is contingent on the nation’s confession of its sin.
In the response to his confessional prayer, Daniel is told that these 70 years are to be multiplied. Although the people were now permitted to return, based on Daniel’s confession, God is still not satisfied with the nation as a whole. This is a message of despair for him and for the nation.
God gives them one more opportunity to mend their ways. (“To finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy.” [NIV])
---------------
Now to the “worms” I mentioned, with each one having its passionate proponent. If only life were simple! These are not in any particular order.
When was the book of Daniel written? Was it a product of the 2nd century BCE, following the supposed fulfilment of this prophecy?
Which “decree” is intended? Was it an utterance of Jeremiah, the edict by Cyrus or that of a later King?
If a future king is intended, which one?
Did the “decree/utterance” relate to the temple or to Jerusalem?
Why are the “seven ‘sevens’” and “sixty-two ‘sevens’” periods separated?
How do we reconcile the chronological relationship between Ezra and Nehemiah?
In which year did Ezra return to Jerusalem? (Differences in several decades are held by various proponents.)
Was Ezra a real person or a fictitious creation?
How can we know what was originally written or intended, given the impacts of subsequent redactors, each with their own – and as yet unknown – immediate agenda?
----------------------
I am certain others can think of other issues that surround these verses.
We do not possess sufficient evidence that provides absolute objective proof.
As I said, this shows the futility of having a faith that relies on dates and on chronologies. It shows the futility of having a faith that relies on speculations regarding symbolisms in passages as in Daniel, Ezekiel, Revelation and the like.
Why don’t people want the simple faith in Christ as declared by the Apostle Paul? People look for secret messages, hidden meanings, and dates. Such is futility.
----------------------- While I was speaking and praying, confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel and making my request to the LORD my God for his holy hill — while I was still in prayer, Gabriel, the man I had seen in the earlier vision, came to me in swift flight about the time of the evening sacrifice.
He instructed me and said to me, “Daniel, I have now come to give you insight and understanding. As soon as you began to pray, an answer was given, which I have come to tell you, for you are highly esteemed. Therefore, consider the message and understand the vision:
“Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy.
“Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble.
After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.
He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.(Daniel 9:20-27, NIV)
Leolai, Narkissos: Thanks!. So let me modulate the question - as i understand it now, the interpretation of Daniels 9 is horribly complicated and dangerous ground. If the temple was rebuilt in 455 - not so dangerous ground, but a lot of religiously biased sourced outside the wt support is (as opposed to 607). So to rephrase:
If I only consider the appendix in Insight on persian chronology, and in perticular the issues raised by Johnson (herein the quotation I had in my previous post), is that relatively 'safe?'. I mean, my point is not to disprove the bible - something i want to really emphatize (also because i believe it personally) is that my doubts on the wt has nothing to do with my belief in god or the bible, so if he think this part of the bible can be interpreted as the wt says is can I have no problem with that.
However, if Insight give the reader a proper understanding and does not eg. take quotes out of context is something i think is very interesting and something i want to return to later on when we reach more important subjects such as false prophesies, gods selection, 'signs of the end', etc.
AnnOMaly: the rebuilding of Jerusalem had already started nearly a century before 445 (Haggai blames the returnees for having built their own houses before the temple!)... but more importantly, the whole context of Daniel 9 suggests that the period had started even before that. Not only is the story set before the end of the exile, and if the angel's reply has anything to do with Daniel's request it includes the whole process of reconstruction which was just about to begin rather than just some later stage (the walls and further construction) as described in Nehemiah. The whole 70 weeks of years is a reinterpretation and development of Jeremiah's 70 years (v. 2: 70 x 7, according to the sevenfold pattern of curses in Leviticus 26), which have started even earlier. Daniel is asking when the current period of desolation (which is already under way) will truly end; the revelation is that it will last seven times longer than expected; neither the reconstruction of the temple and the city, nor that of the walls will really put it to an end. Worse things are yet to come before its completion.
AnnOMaly: the rebuilding of Jerusalem had already started nearly a century before 445 (Haggai blames the returnees for having built their own houses before the temple!)...
Ah fair point. But then we have a problem. Why does Nehemiah still view Jerusalem, the city, as being devastated, in ruins? Not just because of the wall, but because there were few people living there, and the city must have looked 'threadbare' if you see what I mean?
bohm: just to clarify, the temple was actually rebuilt in 515 BC (Darius' 6 year, Ezra 6:15). As far as the chronology of Artaxerxes' reign is concerned (which I believe is not the starting point of the 70 weeks of Daniel), I'm no expert in chronology but Jonsson's rebuttal to the WT claims seem rather convincing and easy enough to follow...
AnnOMaly: half-full or half-empty? :) The picture of Jerusalem in Haggai, Zechariah and the first part of Ezra which focuses on the temple is positive (at least from 515 on); the later picture in Nehemiah is mostly negative down to the building of the walls and further repopulation, and this is true of Daniel 9 for an even extended period ("and for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with streets and moat, but in a troubled time," v. 25).
The whole 70 weeks of years is a reinterpretation and development of Jeremiah's 70 years (v. 2: 70 x 7, according to the sevenfold pattern of curses in Leviticus 26), which have started even earlier. Daniel is asking when the current period of desolation (which is already under way) will truly end; the revelation is that it will last seven times longer than expected; neither the reconstruction of the temple and the city, nor that of the walls will really put it to an end. Worse things are yet to come before its completion.
And this is the insight that the interpretation delaying the start of the "seventy weeks" to the reign of Artaxerxes completely misses out on; the "original" 70 years would have long been completed before the longer period of "seventy weeks" could even begin.
It is worth noting that the oldest christological application of the "seventy weeks" (dating to the late second century or early third century AD) preserves this understanding of the start of the "seventy years"; the "anointed ruler" who arrives on the scene seven weeks into the period was identified with Joshua ben-Jozadek, the first high priest after the exile who was anointed in c. 538 BC. So according to this understanding, the "utterance of the word to return and rebuild" (v. 25) had to precede the actual return from Exile.
The text itself indicates that the author had Yahweh, not Artaxerxes, in mind in issuing the "word" to return and rebuild. After all, it was Yahweh who decreed the desolations and captivity in the first place (cf. the sevenfold curse of Leviticus 26 mentioned in Daniel 9:11), and so it was Yahweh who promised a restoration from this disaster. The allusions to Jeremiah in the parallel verses of Daniel 9:2 and 9:25 (unsurprising since the chapter as a whole is a pesher of the seventy years prophecy of Jeremiah) demonstrate that is the "word of Yahweh" to the prophet Jeremiah that is in view:
Daniel 9:2: "I, Daniel, realized (bynty) from the books (b-sprym) that, according to the word of Yahweh (dbr yhwh) that came ('shr hyh) to Jeremiah ('l-yrmyhw) the prophet, the desolations of Jerusalem would last seventy years (shb`ym shnh)".
Daniel 9:25: "Know and understand (td` w-tshkl) this: From the utterance (mtsh) of the word (dbr) to restore and rebuild (l-hshyb w—l-bnwt) Jerusalem until an anointed ruler comes, there will be seven weeks (shb`ym shb`h). And during sixty-two weeks it will be restored and rebuilt (tshwb w—nbnth), with streets and moat but in a time of distress".
Jeremiah 29:10: "This is what Yahweh says: 'When seventy years (shb`ym shnh) are completed for Babylon, I will come to you and graciously fulfill my word (dbry) to restore (lhshyb) you back to this place' ".
Jeremiah 29:30: "Then the word of Yahweh (dbr yhwh) came (hyh) to Jeremiah ('l-yrmyhw)".
Jeremiah 30:1-2, 18: "This is the word (dbr) that came ('shr hyh) to Jeremiah ('l-yrmyhw) from Yahweh (m-'t yhwh): 'This is what Yahweh, the God of Israel, says: "Write in a book (spr) all the words I have spoken to you. The days are coming when I will bring my people Israel and Judah back from captivity and restore (hshbtym) them to the land I gave their forefathers to possess" .... This is what Yahweh says: "I will restore (shb) the fortunes of Jacob's tents and have compassion on his dwellings; the city will be rebuilt (nbnth `yr) on her ruins, and the palace will stand in its proper place" ' ".
Jeremiah 31:38-40: "Yahweh declares: 'The days are coming when this city will be rebuilt (nbnth h-`yr) for me from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate....The city will never again be uprooted or demolished".
Jeremiah 32:1, 28-29, 37: "This is the word (dbr) that came ('shr hyh) to Jeremiah ('l-yrmyhw) from Yahweh (m-'t yhwh) in the tenth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, which was the eighteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar...: "I am about to hand this city over to the Babylonians and to Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, who will capture it. The Babylonians who are attacking this city will come in and set it on fire; they will burn it down.... But I will surely gather them from all the lands where I banish them in my furious anger and great wrath; I will restore them (hshbtym) back to this place and let them live in safety".
This is even more apparent, I think, in the Hebrew text than in English translation: shwb / hshyb, coordinated to bnh with "Jerusalem" as object, is naturally translated into English as "restore(d)". But when the object is thought of as being both a city and people (as is usually the case in Hebrew) the basic sense of coming / bringing back is summoned along with that of restoration, making the expression even more evocative of the return from exile and many other texts in Jeremiah (e.g. 12:15; 16:15; 23:3; 24:6 [along with bnh like 33:10]; 29:14; 30:3; 31:8,16ff; 32:37,44; 33:7,11,26, etc.); this, btw, is just one aspect on the play on this root verb which is particularly central to Jeremiah; 'coming/bringing back,' understood morally of repentance and 'changing one's mind' is another which also combines with the theme of return and building (e.g. 42:10).
That the "coming out of the word" refers to a prophetic decree "coming out from God" is apparent from the immediate context of Daniel 9; in v. 22,23 Gabriel "comes out" and says that "a word has come out" (same root yç').
