RE: Prophecies of Daniel.
March 21, 2013 at 11:19 pm
(This post was last modified: March 21, 2013 at 11:21 pm by jap23.)
As a general question, I'd be interested to know why you think that if Daniel 11v1-35 (up to 167 BC) were written as history in 167 BC, why on earth would the writer have decided to continue with vv36 and onwards? He could have ended it at v35, and it would have been perfect!
The article you provided is kind of irrelevant but I won't dismiss it for being so. I'll make a thread when I get the time.
We probably agree, for the main part, that vv1-35 happened (whether historical or prophetic). vv36 seems to refer to a different time and there isn't really a problem with that, because KOS and KON (kings of north/south) are not described according to the individuals but simply according to their role- as king!
Edit: WARNING- you may not like what I'm about to say:
v36-39 seems to fit with the Roman Empire. In the 2nd and 3rd century BC rome began to dominate the mediterranean region, and thus became the news kings at around that time (in accordance with Dan 2 & Dan 7). Caesars also elevated themselves to god-status, although during those times they were mainly pagan. When the Christians came onto the scene, they were persecuted by pagan Rome- and prospered until the 'indignation is finished'; until the end times (v40- onwards). Eventually the Roman Empire became Christian- but not truly so. Constantine in particular created a half-breed mix of true Christianity and Paganism which has resulted in a big mess of Christian doctrine. The Roman Catholic Church continued from there to persecute any of those who didn't follow them or their doctrines. It is this denomination that honoured the strange half-christian-half-pagan trinitarian God with 'gold, silver, costly stones and treasures' (v38). And, of course, the Roman Catholic Church and the Papal system has stayed even until today (v36), and don't show regard for the desire of women (v37- celibacy).
Of course, it will take a long time to explain everything, but I've briefly explained what I understand v36-39 to be talking about. v40 and onwards would occur 'at the end time' (see v40)- i.e. the future.
In reference to what you said about nothing being fulfilled after 167 BC: What about the Romans? Chapter 2 & 7
we will find that each of the times these three men are mentioned it is saying that even if these three men were to be there in that day, they would only be able to deliver themselves. Ezekiel's point is clearly that these were righteous men who delivered others, not ancient randoms. By the time Ezekiel got this message from God, Daniel had recently delivered all the wise men from the death penalty by having the answer revealed to him in response to a prayer (Dan 2:17-19), likewise Job interceded for his friends (Job 42) and Noah saved his family from the flood.
Why would Ezekiel refer to pagan mythology outside of the scripture that the Jews were to so closely adhere to?
'Justtrist Wrote:Also people back then were much more credulous than us modern people, so it could not taken very long for people to believe that a book like Daniel was actually written by a guy who lived back during the Persian period. This article gives you an idea how credulous the people of the Greco-Roman world were during the first centuries of the 1st millennium CE, I cannot see how the Jews of the period we are covering in this discussion were any less so.Other people were so the Jews must have been too? Don't think so- the Jews were very different when it came to discerning between false prophets and mythology. the Jews had many guidelines for examining false prophets, and carefully excluded apocryphal writings. If Daniel was written in 167 BC as a mimic of a 600 BC tale- that would be a lot more obvious than most apocryphal books. You can say that it was a very credulous time, but it seems the Jews were not so; Baruch was too a prophetic book, but was rejected at the time of its introduction and never was received as genuine by the Jews. They did the same to 'Daniel 13', but not to the rest of Daniel.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/r...kooks.html
The article you provided is kind of irrelevant but I won't dismiss it for being so. I'll make a thread when I get the time.
minimalist Wrote:It seems that everything "Daniel" predicted prior to 167 BC "happened" and everything he predicted after 167 BC did not. This suggests that it was written in 167 BC in the midst of the Maccabaean revolt against the Seleucid empire.In reference to chapter 11:
We probably agree, for the main part, that vv1-35 happened (whether historical or prophetic). vv36 seems to refer to a different time and there isn't really a problem with that, because KOS and KON (kings of north/south) are not described according to the individuals but simply according to their role- as king!
Edit: WARNING- you may not like what I'm about to say:
v36-39 seems to fit with the Roman Empire. In the 2nd and 3rd century BC rome began to dominate the mediterranean region, and thus became the news kings at around that time (in accordance with Dan 2 & Dan 7). Caesars also elevated themselves to god-status, although during those times they were mainly pagan. When the Christians came onto the scene, they were persecuted by pagan Rome- and prospered until the 'indignation is finished'; until the end times (v40- onwards). Eventually the Roman Empire became Christian- but not truly so. Constantine in particular created a half-breed mix of true Christianity and Paganism which has resulted in a big mess of Christian doctrine. The Roman Catholic Church continued from there to persecute any of those who didn't follow them or their doctrines. It is this denomination that honoured the strange half-christian-half-pagan trinitarian God with 'gold, silver, costly stones and treasures' (v38). And, of course, the Roman Catholic Church and the Papal system has stayed even until today (v36), and don't show regard for the desire of women (v37- celibacy).
Of course, it will take a long time to explain everything, but I've briefly explained what I understand v36-39 to be talking about. v40 and onwards would occur 'at the end time' (see v40)- i.e. the future.
In reference to what you said about nothing being fulfilled after 167 BC: What about the Romans? Chapter 2 & 7
Quote:In Ezekiel Daniel is portrayed as some ancient figure like Noah and Job, not as a contemporary of Ezekiel. The same sort of Daniel appears in Urgatic texts (14th century BCE), it is clear from my point of view that Daniel is an old mythical character in Levantine Semitic culture (which the Old Testament emerged out of), who somebody decided to use as the main character of the book of Daniel we find in the bible.If we consider what Ezekiel is actually saying in 14:12-20,
Why would Ezekiel refer to pagan mythology outside of the scripture that the Jews were to so closely adhere to?
I'm kinda busy and don't have much time for these forums, so if you respond to this post, don't expect me to reply immediately- but I will try to get back to you sometime.
