Still piecing things together. Anomalies galore.
Quick question. When do you believe the book of Daniel was written?
More bad chronology from the Watch Tower Society
by Jeffro 78 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Jeffro
AnnOMaly:
When do you believe the book of Daniel was written?
That sounds like a loaded question. "believe"?
The best evidence indicates that the relevant part of Daniel was written in the second half of the 2nd century BCE (Hasmonaean dynasty).
Do you believe some other thing??
-
AnnOMaly
Yes it was a loaded question We'll come to that.
Back to the Darius identification. OK, this is what I have. Pieces. Anomalies.
Josephus, as far as I can see, gives no lengths of tenure for high priests during the Persian period. Therefore, there remains the question of how you know when one succeeded another.
It's a shame I can't do a nice chart (it would take far too long), so I'll try and keep this as straightforward as possible.
Jeshua/Joshua was high priest on return from Babylon - Ant. XI.4 (75). He remained high priest to at least Darius I's 6th year (516 BCE) - Haggai 2:1,2
Josephus attributes a letter, petitioning the cessation of work on Jerusalem's walls, to Cambyses (529-522 BCE). The book of Ezra (4:11f.) attributes the same letter to Artaxerxes (464-424 BCE) - Ant. XI.2 (22)f.
Josephus gives Cambyses 6 years of reign - Ant. XI.2 (30). Babylonian sources give 8 years.
After Cambyses, Jos. attributes 1 year to "the magi" - presumably Gaumata - Ant. XI.3 (31).
After "the magi" Jos. introduces Darius.
The total years from Cambyses to the 2nd year of Darius I are 1 year out. Jos. gives 9 years when they are actually 10.
Josephus says the temple took 7 years to build (Darius yr. 2 to Darius yr. 9) - Ant. XI.4 (106-7). Ezra has the completion of the temple in Darius yr. 6, i.e. 4 years to build - Ezra. 6:15.
From Babylonian sources, we know Darius I reigned a total of 36 years - 521-486 BCE. Neither the Bible nor Josephus tells us how long he reigned.
Jos. correctly says Xerxes succeeded Darius - Ant. XI.5 (120). He suggests that approximately around Xerxes' accession, Joiakim/Joacim became high priest - Ant. XI.5 (121).
The letter given to Esdras/Ezra - Josephus attributes it to Xerxes in his 7th year (which would be 479/8 BCE) - Ant. XI.5 (123, 135). The book of Ezra attributes the same letter to Artaxerxes' 7th year (which would be 458/7 BCE) - Ezra 7:11f.
Incidentally, the Bible has Esther made Xerxes' queen in his 7th year - Esther 2:16. In Josephus, Esther is married to Artaxerxes in his 7th year.
According to Josephus, Eliasib's 'son,' Johanan, was officiating in some capacity at the temple sometime between Xerxes' 7th (would be 479/8 BCE) and 25th years (?) - Ant. XI.5 (135, 147, 168). Eliasib succeeded his father as high priest sometime shortly before Nehemiah was given permission by Xerxes, in his 25th year, to go to Jerusalem - Ant. XI.5 (158, 159, 168).
Babylonian sources have Xerxes reigning only 21 years, so Josephus' "twenty and fifth year" is a mistake.
The book of Ezra (10:6) also has Eliashib's 'son,' Johanan (really his grandson) officiating in some capacity at the temple, but this was sometime around or after Artaxerxes' 7th year. The book of Nehemiah says that in Artaxerxes' 20th year (would be 445/4 BCE) he gave Nehemiah permission to leave for Jerusalem. Eliashib was high priest at the time - Neh. 1:1; 2:1; 3:1, 20.
Josephus says that the city wall was rebuilt after 2 years, 4 months' work and completed in Xerxes' year 28, month 9 (remember, it's been independently established Xerxes only reigned 21 years) - Ant. XI.5 (179). The book of Nehemiah says the wall was rebuilt in 52 days and completed in month 6, in Artaxerxes' reign, year unclear to me - Neh. 6:15.
Then Jos. relates the story of Esther, who he believes was married to Artaxerxes, Xerxes' successor - Ant. XI.6. No length of reign is given.
I cannot see any synchronisms between any kings and high priests since Eliasib and Xerxes for Josephus (until ch. 7), or Eliashib and Artaxerxes for Nehemiah.
There is no time-line for the high priests in either the Bible or Josephus. When Josephus mentions kings' regnal years, they often conflict with other sources. I think you can see why I'm skeptical of your chronological chart here. I may have missed some key details, but if I have, I'm sure you or somebody else will draw my attention to them.
Not finished yet. More following ...
-
AnnOMaly
Using Josephus' sequence of kings from his last synchronism between a high priest and Persian king, i.e. Eliasib and Xerxes (let's use his last year, 21 - 465/4 BCE), until the next synchronism in Ant. XI.7 & 8, i.e. Jaddua and the last Darius (Darius Yr. 5 - 331/0 BCE), there are 134 years.
Artaxerxes I - 41 years;
Darius II - 19 years;
Artaxerxes II - 46 years;
Artaxerxes III - 21 years;
Arses - 2 years;
Darius III - 5 years.
Unfortunately, Jos. omits mention of Darius II, Artaxerxes II or III (except in passing) and Arses, so there's a huge chunk of history missing before he takes up the stories of Johanan and Bagoses, Jaddua, Darius III and Alexander.
Using the Bible's last synchronism between high priest and king, i.e. Eliashib and Artaxerxes' 20th year (445/4 BCE) up to Darius III, Yr. 5 (331/0 BCE), there are 114 years:
Artaxerxes I - (remaining) 21 years;
The rest, as above.
If we only go up to the end of Darius II (Yr. 19 - 405/4 BCE), there are only 40 years. On the face of it, it would be hard to cram in 3 generations of high priests in so short a time-frame. However, we do not know how old Eliashib was when he became high priest in Artaxerxes' reign or exactly when in Artaxerxes' reign he took office. We do know his grandson Johanan was old enough to have responsibilities in the temple (with his own chamber!) by the 7th year of Artaxerxes. It's interesting that both Josephus and the Bible omit mention of Johanan's father Joiada/Judas here. It's suggestive that Joiada's tenure as high priest (if indeed he ever did become high priest - we only have Josephus' word for it) was short-lived.
Even if we take Josephus at his word on this point, that Eliasib's (grand)son Johanan was officiating at the temple around Xerxes' 7th year, he would be about 2 decades further removed from both Darius II and Darius III. If he was about 30 in Xerxes' yr. 7 (479/8 BCE), he would have been about 70 years old in Darius II's yr. 14 (410/9 BCE - Elephantine Papyrus - yes, 14th year - we'll get to that in a minute.) It is within the realms of possibility that Jaddua his son succeeded him before Darius' last regnal year (19).
The Elephantine Papyrus gives a synchronism between high priest Johanan, Bagoas, governor of Judea and Sanballat, governor of Samaria. The letter is addressed to Bagoas with mention of further letters being sent about the same matter to the sons of Sanballat. Although it was written in Darius II's 17th year, it does not say Johanan was still high priest then. All it says is that a letter was sent to Johanan the high priest in Darius' 14th year and there had been no reply. So the 14th year is the last certain year of Johanan as high priest, as far as I can see.
You said you found it special pleading to assume two 'Jadduas' and 'Bagoases' - one set occuring in Darius II's time and another set occurring in Darius III's time. In that case, there is an additional problem: Sanballat. How many Sanballats were there? He is a key figure in Josephus' account in Ant. XI, chs 7 and 8.
According to Josephus, Jaddua's brother (Eliashib's great-grandson) was Sanballat's son-in-law - Ant. XI.7 (302); 8 (322). According to Nehemiah (13:28), one of Eliashib's grandsons (and thus Johanan's brother) was Sanballat's son-in-law. Sanballat was around causing havoc for the Jews from Artaxerxes' 20th year (445/4 BCE) onward. It's also of note that the writer of Nehemiah still calls Eliashib "the high priest" when his grandson married into Sanballat's family. Thus the 'Sanballat' from Nehemiah's time and the one Jos. puts in Darius III's time are well over a century apart! Sanballat is said to have died after the sieges of Tyre and Gaza which would date it to late 332 BCE - Ant. XI.8 (325). The same Sanballat?
Also of interest, Jos. has the high priest (Jaddua) and priests showing Alexander the book of Daniel. This would mean that the book of Daniel was circulating and canonical by the 4th c. BCE, no? Or is Josephus mistaken here too?
So what do you think? Are you still going to stick with your chart on priestly succession? Do you still think the WTS and others who favor the Darius II identification are 'moronic'? Or do you think they have some grounds for their preference and their distrust of Josephus here?
-
Jeffro
The book of Ezra (4:11f.) attributes the same letter to Artaxerxes
Artaxerxes is a throne name. Cambyses wasn't as prominent as the ruler later referred to as 'Artaxerxes I' (kind of like how what we call 'World War I' wasn't really the first major war). Ezra 4:11 most likely refers to Bardiya (as 'Artaxerxes'), whereas Ezra 4:6 refers to Cambyses as 'Ahasuerus' (also a throne name).
The book of Ezra (10:6) also has Eliashib's 'son,' Johanan (really his grandson) officiating in some capacity at the temple, but this was sometime around or after Artaxerxes' 7th year. The book of Nehemiah says that in Artaxerxes' 20th year (would be 445/4 BCE) he gave Nehemiah permission to leave for Jerusalem. Eliashib was high priest at the time - Neh. 1:1; 2:1; 3:1, 20.
Johanan was priest during the 7th year of Artaxerxes II. That makes perfect sense, being the grandson of Eliashib. There is no conflict with Eliashib being priest in the 20th year of Araxerxes I.
The same Sanballat?
The simplest (and traditional Jewish) explanation is that Josephus' references to the 'later' Sanballat were a retelling of an earlier event.
Also of interest, Jos. has the high priest (Jaddua) and priests showing Alexander the book of Daniel. This would mean that the book of Daniel was circulating and canonical by the 4th c. BCE, no? Or is Josephus mistaken here too?
As I stated in an earlier post, this is almost certainly folklore. There is no conflict with the story being circulated well before the time of Josephus.
So what do you think? Are you still going to stick with your chart on priestly succession? Do you still think the WTS and others who favor the Darius II identification are 'moronic'? Or do you think they have some grounds for their preference and their distrust of Josephus here?
My chart doesn't disagree with the clearest parts of the information you've provided. I do not doubt that many of the years given are approximate - as well as difficult to verify - but the basic order seems entirely plausible, without the gymnastics otherwise required for Eliashib and Johanan's tenures as High Priest. I've done a reasonable job of sorting the wheat from the chaff. Unlike my chart for the Neo-Babylonian period however, there is indeed greater scope for variation in this period due to the paucity of reliable information.
-
mP
Its an established fact by scholars that daniel was written about 160bce. His language, and the name form of nebu for example are the greek form and not the original. I cant recall which other bible book contains the original babylonian but there is a difference in the pronounciation that is significantly different.
-
mP
Also of interest, Jos. has the high priest ( Jaddua ) and priests showing Alexander the book of Daniel. This would mean that the book of Daniel was circulating and canonical by the 4th c. BCE, no? Or is Josephus mistaken here too?
mP:
Why would Alexander waste his time with Israel ? Its not as if they were great in anyway. however hwe was fascinated with Egypt and Persia, because lets be fair they were great in so many ways.
-
Jeffro
From your first response. Most of the problems are resolved when it's realised that Josephus simply gets his names of 'Xerxes' and 'Artaxerxes' mixed up. Highlighting in green agrees with my chart. Red text indicates errors (mostly by Josephus). Blue text indicates inserted corrections. The rest is your text...
Jeshua/Joshua was high priest on return from Babylon - Ant. XI.4 (75). He remained high priest to at least Darius I's 6th year (516 BCE) - Haggai 2:1,2
Josephus attributes a letter, petitioning the cessation of work on Jerusalem's walls, to Cambyses (529-522 BCE). The book of Ezra (4:11f.) attributes the same letter to Artaxerxes(Gaumata/Bardiya [522 BCE]) (464-424 BCE) - Ant. XI.2 (22)f.
Josephus gives Cambyses 6 years of reign - Ant. XI.2 (30). Babylonian sources give 8 years.
After Cambyses, Jos. attributes 1 year to "the magi" - presumably Gaumata(or Bardiya, who may have been an imposter) - Ant. XI.3 (31).
After "the magi" Jos. introduces Darius.
The total years from Cambyses to the 2nd year of Darius I are 1 year out. Jos. gives 9 years when they are actually 10.
Josephus says the temple took 7 years to build (Darius yr. 2 to Darius yr. 9) - Ant. XI.4 (106-7).Ezra has the completion of the temple in Darius yr. 6, i.e. 4 years to build - Ezra. 6:15.
From Babylonian sources, we know Darius I reigned a total of 36 years - 521-486 BCE. Neither the Bible nor Josephus tells us how long he reigned.
Jos. correctly says Xerxes succeeded Darius - Ant. XI.5 (120). He suggests that approximately around Xerxes' accession, Joiakim/Joacim became high priest - Ant. XI.5 (121).
The letter given to Esdras/Ezra - Josephus attributes it to Xerxes Artaxerxes in his 7th year (which would be 479/8 BCE) - Ant. XI.5 (123, 135). The book of Ezra attributes the same letter to Artaxerxes' 7th year (which would be 458/7 BCE) - Ezra 7:11f.
Incidentally, the Bible has Esther made Xerxes' queen in his 7th year - Esther 2:16. In Josephus, Esther is married to Artaxerxes Xerxes in his 7th year.
According to Josephus, Eliasib's 'son,' Johanan, was officiating in some capacity at the temple sometime between Xerxes'Araxerxes (II)'7th (would be 479/8 BCE) and 25th years (?) - Ant. XI.5 (135, 147, 168). Eliasib succeeded his father as high priest sometime shortly before Nehemiah was given permission by Xerxes Artaxerxes, in his 25th year, to go to Jerusalem - Ant. XI.5 (158, 159, 168).
Babylonian sources have Xerxes reigning only 21 years, so Josephus' "twenty and fifth year" is a mistake. (25 may be correct if Josephus' 'Xerxes' should be Artaxerxes I.)
The book of Ezra (10:6) also has Eliashib's 'son,' Johanan (really his grandson)officiating in some capacity at the temple, but this was sometime around or after Artaxerxes' 7th year (7th year of Artaxerxes II = 397 BCE). The book of Nehemiah says that in Artaxerxes'(I)20th year (would be 445/4 BCE) he gave Nehemiah permission to leave for Jerusalem. Eliashib was high priest at the time - Neh. 1:1; 2:1; 3:1, 20.
Josephus says that the city wall was rebuilt after 2 years, 4 months' work and completed in Xerxes'Artaxerxes I year 28, month 9 (remember, it's been independently established Xerxes only reigned 21 years) - Ant. XI.5 (179). The book of Nehemiah says the wall was rebuilt in 52 days and completed in month 6, in Artaxerxes' reign, year unclear to me - Neh. 6:15.
Then Jos. relates the story of Esther, who he believes was married to ArtaxerxesXerxes, Xerxes'Darius' successor - Ant. XI.6. No length of reign is given.
-
Jeffro
Second post... same syntax...
Using Josephus' sequence of kings from his last synchronism between a high priest and Persian king, i.e. Eliasib and Xerxes (though Josephus' reference should really be Artaxerxes, but can count from Xerxes for this purpose) (let's use his last year, 21 - 465/4 BCE), until the next synchronism in Ant. XI.7 & 8, i.e. Jaddua and the last Darius (Darius Yr. 5 - 331/0 BCE), there are 134 years.
Artaxerxes I - 41 yearsexcluding accession;
Darius II - 19 years; excluding accession
Artaxerxes II - 46 years;excluding accession
Artaxerxes III - 21 years; including accession
Arses - 2 years; excluding accession
Darius III - 56 years. excluding accession
Unfortunately, Jos. omits mention of Darius II, Artaxerxes II or III (except in passing) and Arses, so there's a huge chunk of history missing before he takes up the stories of Johanan and Bagoses, Jaddua, Darius III and Alexander.
Using the Bible's last synchronism between high priest and king, i.e. Eliashib and Artaxerxes' 20th year (445/4 BCE) up to Darius III, Yr. 5 (331/0 BCE), there are 114 years:
Artaxerxes I - (remaining) 21 years;
The rest, as above.
If we only go up to the end of Darius II (Yr. 19 - 405/4 BCE), there are only 40 years. On the face of it, it would be hard to cram in 3 generations of high priests in so short a time-frame. However, we do not know how old Eliashib was when he became high priest in Artaxerxes' reign or exactly when in Artaxerxes' reign he took office. We do know his grandson Johanan was old enough to have responsibilities in the temple (with his own chamber!) by the 7th year of Artaxerxes(II). It's interesting that both Josephus and the Bible omit mention of Johanan's father Joiada/Judas here Joiada is mentioned in passing at Nehemiah 12:10, 11, 22; 13:28. It's suggestive that Joiada's tenure as high priest (if indeed he ever did become high priest - we only have Josephus' word for it) was short-lived or uneventful.
Even if we take Josephus at his word on this point, that Eliasib's (grand)son Johanan was officiating at the temple around Xerxes' Artaxerxes II's7th year, he would be about 2 decades further removed from both Darius II and Darius III. If he was about 30 in Xerxes' yr. 7 (479/8 BCE), he would have been about 70 years old in Darius II's yr. 14 (410/9 BCE - Elephantine Papyrus - yes, 14th year - we'll get to that in a minute.) It is within the realms of possibility that Jaddua his son succeeded him before Darius' last regnal year (19).
The Elephantine Papyrus gives a synchronism between high priest Johanan, Bagoas, governor of Judea and Sanballat, governor of Samaria. The letter is addressed to Bagoas with mention of further letters being sent about the same matter to the sons of Sanballat. Although it was written in Darius II's 17th year, it does not say Johanan was still high priest thennor that he wasn't. All it says is that a letter was sent to Johanan the high priest in Darius' 14th year and there had been no reply. So the 14th year is the last certain year of Johanan as high priest, as far as I can see.
You said you found it special pleading to assume two 'Jadduas' and 'Bagoases' - one set occuring in Darius II's time and another set occurring in Darius III's time. In that case, there is an additional problem: Sanballat. How many Sanballats were there? He is a key figure in Josephus' account in Ant. XI, chs 7 and 8. It is considerably more likely that two people were named Sanballat than that there were two sequences of people with the same names.
According to Josephus, Jaddua's brother (Eliashib's great-grandson) was Sanballat's son-in-law - Ant. XI.7 (302); 8 (322). According to Nehemiah (13:28), one of Eliashib's grandsons (and thus Johanan's brother) was Sanballat's son-in-law. Sanballat was around causing havoc for the Jews from Artaxerxes' 20th year (445/4 BCE) onward. It's also of note that the writer of Nehemiah still calls Eliashib "the high priest" when his grandson married into Sanballat's family. Thus the 'Sanballat' from Nehemiah's time and the one Jos. puts in Darius III's time are well over a century apart! Sanballat is said to have died after the sieges of Tyre and Gaza which would date it to late 332 BCE - Ant. XI.8 (325). The same Sanballat? Almost certainly not the same person. Is it really less likely that there were two 'Sanballats' in over a century, rather than a repeated sequence of people with the same names??
Also of interest, Jos. has the high priest (Jaddua) and priests showing Alexander the book of Daniel almost certainly spurious. This would mean that the book of Daniel was circulating and canonical by the 4th c. BCE, no? Or is Josephus mistaken here too? Might a Jewish historian believe a Jewish story purported as historical that had been circulating for over 200 years? Sure.
So what do you think? Are you still going to stick with your chart on priestly succession? Yep Do you still think the WTS and others who favor the Darius II identification are 'moronic'? The WTS is also moronic for other reasons. Or do you think they have some grounds for their preference and their distrust of Josephus here? As stated earlier, we all know that Josephus has errors, but most for the period in question involve simple errors of reporting the wrong Xerxes or Artaxerxes.
-
ablebodiedman
The retrofit of the '70 weeks' 'prophecy' to supposedly point to Jesus is a later Christian forgery. Their premise for shifting the reigns of Xerxes and Artaxerxes is therefore redundant.
Yes, this chronology is intended to pinpoint the; "going forth of the word to rebuild Jerusalem".
I suggest that this chronology is so far off that contending over these before Christ dates (BCE) dates is entirely redundant.
The going forth of the word to rebuild Jerusalem happened in the first Century!
You may not believe me however, perhaps you should give some credibility to the Apostles who seemed completely aware of this:
Acts 15:12-18
After they quit speaking, James answered, saying: "Men, brothers, hear me. 14 Sym´e·on has related thoroughly how God for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name. 15 And with this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written, 16 ‘After these things I shall return and rebuild the booth of David that is fallen down; and I shall rebuild its ruins and erect it again, 17 in order that those who remain of the men may earnestly seek Jehovah, together with people of all the nations, people who are called by my name, says Jehovah, who is doing these things, 18 known from of old.’
The Apostles came to terms with the fact that the "rebuilding prophecy" had just recently begun its fulfillment in the 1st Century!
Why can the Watchtower Society and everyone else not come to terms with something very straightforward and plainly written in the bible?
abe