Jan...what can I say other than it was the spirit of the times. WW1 had galvanized the minds of many that the end was near. The efforts of the League of Nations for example were condemned by a number of millenarians as a ruse of dark forces to blind believers to the truth, that peace was impossible. Any text that could be, was interpreted as confirming this mindset.
peacefulpete
JoinedPosts by peacefulpete
-
40
Dates and times
by jhine inlast night at my bible study group we looked at 1thessalonians ch 5 .
we have been working through the whole letter.
verses 1-11 start with .
-
-
-
40
Dates and times
by jhine inlast night at my bible study group we looked at 1thessalonians ch 5 .
we have been working through the whole letter.
verses 1-11 start with .
-
-
peacefulpete
It is one of the more obvious misinterpretations of the WT.
The passage is literally saying not to speculate about when the destruction would come, insisting that it will be as unpredictable as a thief in the night and that there will not be a sign. (written before the Gospels) Everyone will be going about life as usual in peace, no terrors, no warnings. Then the advice is that Christians be always "awake" so as not be caught off guard.
It is hilarious actually that the WT and others before them spun the very verse into a sign, a sign of no signs! They lift the phrase "peace and safety" and create a new global event/sign to watch for.
It's like my doctor telling me there are no warnings for cancer to occur, it can happen when least expected, so I interpret my lack of symptoms as a sign of cancer.
On the converse, Paul seems to be saying assume that any day you will get cancer. I'm not sure how healthy that is.
-
56
Old Greek Daniel's Son of Man
by peacefulpete inagain this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site.
the basic question i want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in daniel 7. as we all know christians understood the figure to be the messiah (christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of israel as jews typically read it?
or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?.
-
-
peacefulpete
Vidqun....the OG translation you posted is apparently a 'corrected' version of the original.
It reads: ἐθεώρουν ἐν ὁράματι τῆς νυκτὸς καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐπὶ τῶν νεφελῶντοῦ οὐρανοῦ ὡς υἱὸς ἀνθρώπουἤρχετο καὶ [ἕ]ὡς παλαιὸςἡμερῶν παρῆνκαὶ οἱ παρεστηκότες παρῆσαν[προσήγαγον] αὐτῷ
Jeffro.....I can't help but think of the Enochic works. The Son of Man's throne is reserved ultimately for Enoch. Symbolism and typology dominated.
-
56
Old Greek Daniel's Son of Man
by peacefulpete inagain this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site.
the basic question i want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in daniel 7. as we all know christians understood the figure to be the messiah (christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of israel as jews typically read it?
or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?.
-
-
peacefulpete
Jeffro, I appreciate the response. I'm certain you are correct that the "one like a son of man" was intended to mean "like a man/human", that is the underlying irony/reversal of expectation being dramatized. Repeatedly in Daniel and related works the reversal of fortune/destiny figures into the concept of divine provenance. The unlikeliest, the downtrodden, the lowliest become the powerful. In this pericope, the divine (or other heavenly entity depending upon form of vs 13) taking on the appearance of a man is elevated to the eternal King. I'll add that no mention is made of David or Davidic messianism. Not all sects of Judaism shared that particular idea and it would appear the author had opportunity but did not include this concept.
-
56
Old Greek Daniel's Son of Man
by peacefulpete inagain this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site.
the basic question i want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in daniel 7. as we all know christians understood the figure to be the messiah (christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of israel as jews typically read it?
or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?.
-
-
peacefulpete
Reasonfirst....That book is referenced in one of the articles I linked. No reason to be shy around me, please share any insights or suggestions, pointless or not.
-
56
Old Greek Daniel's Son of Man
by peacefulpete inagain this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site.
the basic question i want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in daniel 7. as we all know christians understood the figure to be the messiah (christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of israel as jews typically read it?
or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?.
-
-
peacefulpete
SBF...You covered the topic pretty well. Identification shifted with time, politics, and translation. The crux of the matter is the pre-Christian developments that contributed to hypostatic Christology. The Son of Man appears in OG not merely as a messianic agent but as an aspect of God, much like Light, Logos, or Wisdom. Separate and described acting autonomously but yet in reality God.
-
56
Old Greek Daniel's Son of Man
by peacefulpete inagain this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site.
the basic question i want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in daniel 7. as we all know christians understood the figure to be the messiah (christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of israel as jews typically read it?
or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?.
-
-
peacefulpete
Vienna, It's a proposal that has some explanatory power. As he says unfortunately we have no ancient Hebrew versions with which to compare. Ultimately it doesn't matter as much as it seems. Once a variant text existed, readers understood the text differently. IOW, however the OG variant came to be (closer to original, scribal error, or theological alteration) subsequent readers would have seen the text differently...
You may have noticed this comment in the article:
We know that the language of Rev 1:13-14, where the exaltedJesus is called “son of man” but is depicted in terms that correspond tothe Ancient of Days of Dan 7:9 (“white hair”), was shaped by Dan 7:13OG, while other allusions to Daniel 7 – most notably in the Gospels – presuppose the clear distinction between the two characters found inthe Aramaic text and Theodotion.
-
56
Old Greek Daniel's Son of Man
by peacefulpete inagain this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site.
the basic question i want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in daniel 7. as we all know christians understood the figure to be the messiah (christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of israel as jews typically read it?
or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?.
-
-
-
56
Old Greek Daniel's Son of Man
by peacefulpete inagain this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site.
the basic question i want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in daniel 7. as we all know christians understood the figure to be the messiah (christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of israel as jews typically read it?
or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?.
-
-
peacefulpete
It is noted that the identification of the SofM as 'holy ones of Israel' is the result of the seeming substitution of the 'holy ones' with the SofM in the angelic interpretation offered in verse 27:
27 Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of all the kingdoms under heaven will be handed over to the holy people of the Most High. His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship and obey him.’
This reads rather awkward and has long been suggested to be the result of some type of gloss. Has the SofM been effectively erased from this passage to support the reading that the SofM is to be identified with the SofM?
To repeat, many have noted that only the Son of man is referred to in the vision section while only the 'holy ones' are said to receive the power in the interpretation in the MT and Theodotian forms. This is what leads many to conclude that the author intended to strictly identify the SofM as holy ones of Israel collectively. This however is not the case in the OG. In OG the holy ones are referred to in vs 8 of the vision. They are on the scene when the SofM appears. This makes the identification of SofM with holy ones improbable. This does suggest someone has removed the vs.8 reference to the holy ones in the Aramaic vorlage behind the MT and Theodotian to provide for the interpretation of the SofM as Israel and not that the SofM is the leader of the holy ones of Israel and as such all the nations. Perhaps as a result of changing Messianic views then current.
-
56
Old Greek Daniel's Son of Man
by peacefulpete inagain this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site.
the basic question i want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in daniel 7. as we all know christians understood the figure to be the messiah (christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of israel as jews typically read it?
or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?.
-
-
peacefulpete
There are a number of suggestions explaining this difference. One is the reading is the result of an effort to remove the concept of the Two Powers in Heaven that was seen as a threat by some. IOW instead of two powers, now there is only one. A second proposal suggests the opposite, that the MT (Masoretic) reading had been altered.
Johan Lust proposed the thesis that the current MT is, in fact, an “early Targum” of the original Hebrew text of Daniel, and that the OG translates, accurately, that original Hebrew text, now lost, in which the Ancient of Days and the Son of Man were, indeed, “one and the same symbol.”
In this case, the distinction between the Ancient of Days and the Son of Man would have been
introduced by the current MT – the Aramaic that supplanted the original Hebrew – in order to give voice to the apocalyptic-messianist agenda of that “early Targum.”