New 607 info?

by startingover 73 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  no one

  startingover,

  I've wondered if they became a bit more vague about Dan. 2:1 because of the chronological conflict the statement creates with Ezekiel.

  In the "All Scripture" book under Ezekiel, they list what year it is under nearly every subheading. Using their chronology, Ezek. 24:1 (9th year) is 609. Ezek. 29:1 (10th year) is 608.

  Sandwiched in between these chapters is this pronounciation against the king of Tyre: "look! you are wiser than Daniel. There are no secrets that have proved a match for you." (Ezek. 28:3) In the large print NWT, a reference superscript for "Daniel" points to Daniel 2:48.

  The closest year identifier for Chapter 28 is Ezek. 26:1 (11th year). No month is given, so by WT chronology, it should be 608 or 607 depending on how Ezekiel reckons the start of his exile; leaving Jerusalem (Adar), arriving at his city of exile, or just using the Jewish calendar where the month mentioned is the actual month of the year.

  How has Daniel gained so much fame that he requires no explanation as to who he is in a declaration to a foreign king (Tyre) in 608/7 when he (Daniel) hasn't been faced with Nebuchadnezzar's 1st dream yet in 606/5? Even Nebuchadnezzar doesn't consider him as capable at this point since Daniel was not brought before the king, but instead Daniel seeks the king out; and not to reveal the dream, but to ask for time. So, Dan.1:17 seems to be a segue to Chapter 2 and Daniel doesn't yet have the dream interpreting ability until his prayer in chap. 2.
• 

  Leolaia

  starting over....Ezekiel makes no reference to "Daniel". The name is consistently spelled dn'l, not dny'l, and "Danel" was a Job-like noble from Canaanite legend whose only son Aqhat (identical to Actaeon in Greek myth) was killed by the war goddess Anat. Note that by comparing him to Job and Noah, Ezekiel 14 is naming someone from the distant past -- not a contemporary. And what did Danel, Noah, and Job all have in common? They tried to save their children.

  "The Legend of Aqhat, one of the great epic myths preserved in the Ugaritic archive at Ras Shamra, was popular in some form in Israel and Judah and shows its traces in the OT and later Jewish literature. Ezekiel 14:12-20, 28:1-3 makes several passing references to the legend and its hero, an ancient semi-divine king named Danel renowned for his wisdom and healing powers. Danel was one of the Rephaim, a primeval race of demigod kings who linger on as spirits in Sheol and who were revered by the Canaanites in ancestor worship (cf. Job 26:5, Proverbs 9:18, 21:16, and especially Isaiah 14:9 which refer to the Rephaim as the ghosts of dead kings and the dead in general, and Genesis 14:5, Deuteronomy 3:13, and 2 Samuel 21:16, 18 which refer to them as the ancient aboriginal inhabitants of Canaan, of gigantic stature like the Nephilim). Ezekiel 28:1-3 alludes to Danel's famed wisdom and 14:12-20 alludes to the death and rebirth of his son Aqhat. In the Ugaritic version of the legend, the divine craftsman Kothar bequeathed the newborn Aqhat with a bow made in his heavenly workshop but the war goddess Anat wanted the bow for herself, and after a long struggle to convince the youth to give it up, she dispatched two monsters to kill the boy. Having lost his only heir, Danel cursed the land and El, feeling pity on the king, blessed the king and brought back his son to life -- blessings reminiscent of Job in Job 42:10-17. Thus Danel was "able to save [his] son", as Ezekiel 14:12-20 says of him, comparing him to Job and Noah (who also saved his family). There are later scattered allusions to the Legend of Aqhat in 1 Enoch 6:7, 69:2 and Jubilees 4:17-21."

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/67904/1.ashx

  Ezekiel 28 is otherwise dependent on Canaanite myth, especially since it is addressed to the king of Tyre, and the Phoenicians shared much of their mythology with Canaan. Thus in v. 2 reference is made to the god El dwelling "in the midst of the seas", the wisdom of Danel is mentioned in v. 3, the divine dwelling of Eden being on the "mountain of God/the gods" in v. 13-14, and so forth. A similar judgment oracle in Isaiah 14 is also heavily dependent on Canaanite mythological concepts (e.g. the "Rephaim"..."Helel son of Shahar"..."stars of El"..."mountain of assembly"..."Elyon"..."Zephon"...etc.).
• 

  no one

  Leolaia,

  I was addressing startingover's observations on the WT spin on scripture. Most JWs aren't going to be receptive to ancient myths and legends as influencing the Bible, even if true. For me, to talk to these people, you have to buy in to their beliefs and chronology, then pose questions to them that raise doubts about the problems that their statementsand chronology create.

  As shown by the superscript notation that I stated, it's obvious that to the WTBTS, the Daniel of Ezekiel is the one and only Daniel of the book of Daniel. Whether I believe it or not, when talking to a JW, to allow the conversation to progress with them, I allow myself to say, "OK, Dan. 2:1 is the 2nd year of Nebuchadnezzar in regard to his becoming king of Jerusalem. But hey, doesn't this create a problem over here in Ezekiel where he says..."

  Since there are JW lurkers here, I wanted to post in a way where they can reference their own literature without having to resort to 'pagan' sources and perhaps go hmmmmm.
• 

  shotgun

  I tend to agree with Runningman on this and think they would explain it away in a heartbeat as Kingship over all the neighbouring nations not Kingship of Babylon which they still state on the same pages as 624BC.

  Alleymom's thread uses the best argument but truthfully it is all in vain when discussing it with anyone other than forum members...blinded dubs can't grasp obvious things like UN association and child molesting. Even the simple math of the rulerships which don't add up using WT chronology are swept aside as can be seen by Scholar's JW reasoning.
• 

  Leolaia

  no one....I understand and appreciate your desire to not turn off impressionable Witnesses reluctant to critically examine their faith or their Organization. However, I mentioned this info for you because the argument you were making is a fallacious one. It doesn't even matter if you don't want to expose yourself to the info on the legend of Danel, it should be clear from the spelling of the names (consistently dn'l in Ezekiel, dny'l in Daniel), the pairing of Danel with ancient patriarchs Noah and Job, the chronological problem you noted (in how Daniel would've been famed in wisdom at that time), and the lack of any tradition of Daniel saving his children -- let alone even having children, that the Danel of Ezekiel and the Daniel of Daniel are two separate individuals. It is an erroneous assumption on the Society's part that Ezekiel discusses the hero of the book of Daniel. Their chronology is also fatally erroneous. Now I don't believe it is prudent to play one error off another; we should rather expose error through known facts. Otherwise, the argument would simply be based on a red herring.
• 

  no one

  Leolaia,

  It is an erroneous assumption on the Society's part that Ezekiel discusses the hero of the book of Daniel.

  Be that as it may, if you're going to have a discussion with JWs, it usually has to be on their terms. And, as stated, they have committed that the Daniel of Ezek. is Daniel. So-let's play their game.

  Their chronology is also fatally erroneous.

  We're on the same team here.

  Now I don't believe it is prudent to play one error off another; we should rather expose error through known facts. Otherwise, the argument would simply be based on a red herring.

  Everyone has their own game/strategy. I doubt you'd find many here with loved ones still in that would tell those they are trying to 'get out' that the Bible is based simply on myths. And how many witnesses have you ever met that have looked at the spelling in Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek the word Daniel.

  There is an audience here for your work. As stated privately to you, I am a fan. But to talk to the average 'joe witness', I'm afraid that the 'glazed-over' look would show up a lot sooner in your conversation with them of Daniel than mine.
• 

  Triple A

  Scholar shows his lack of knowledge of biblical and secular chronology

  Follow the Bible or man's interpretation of secular documents. The date of 607 and 624 nicely coincides with the other synchronisms in the biblical record.

  But than he tips his hand in his second post

  I know the answer and it is rather simple and if you really understand WT chronology then the answer is readily apparent.

  It does not matter what the truth is to Scholar, it only matters what the WTS says.
• 

  Leolaia

  Everyone has their own game/strategy.

  I understand. I just don't feel comfortable with basing an argument on a known error.

  But to talk to the average 'joe witness', I'm afraid that the 'glazed-over' look would show up a lot sooner in your conversation with them of Daniel than mine.

  I hope realize that in talking to a Witness one-on-one, I might express myself in a rather different way than I do here. Especially focus on what matters more to their interest than mine.

  I also don't think discussion about mythology is inappropriate if the person interested is not disinclined.
• 

  no one

  Especially focus on what matters more to their interest than mine.

  You may have to elaborate on this for me. Their interest, IMO, is to convert you to their thinking.
• 

  no one

  P.S. Leolaia,

  I just don't feel comfortable with basing an argument on a known error.

  Most parents will tell you that a number of their arguments with their children are based on a known error. The children know it; we, as parents, know it, but the argument has to occur anyway.