pseudo-scholar says: "[M]ost scholars deny the fact of Neb's seven year absence from the throne. Further, there is no record of such a literal fulfillment as history in Neo-Babylonian history nor any account of in Neo-Babyloian chronology. So, this means that such literal fulfillment did not occur according to majority opinion so the only other meaning of the story as it appears in Daniel 4 is that it must be allegorical/methaphorical or have a anti-typical fulfillment alone". This adds to his statement in his prior post that "[t]he seven times does not refer to Nebuchadnezzer's seven years of dethronement".
Notice here that he is here making an argument from authority (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority); the evidence or argumentation that leads "most scholars" to this conclusion is not mentioned, what matters to him is only that there is a "majority opinion". Now, a consensus is a good sign that the evidence is persuasive and that the claim has survived a certain (high) level of critical debate (and thus may be mentioned as an indicator of how the evidence is generally evaluated), but it is the evidence and logical argumentation that bears directly on the claim's correctness. But pseudo-scholar does not mention the actual evidence that informs scholarly opinion, other than the negative evidence that "there is no record of such a literal fulfillment as history". What pseudo-scholar doesn't let on is that scholars are not simply persuaded by an argument from absence....there is positive evidence that the story in Daniel 4 is based loosely on events from the life of Nabonidus, not Nebuchadnezzar. Those commentaries that pseudo-scholar says he is familiar with (at least those since the 1960s) discuss in detail the relationship between the Danielic story and the Verse Account of Nabonidus and the Prayer of Nabonidus from the Dead Sea Scrolls. The parallels between the latter and Daniel 4-5 are especially striking. And even the story in Daniel 5 claims that the humiliation related in ch. 4 befell the father of Belshazzar; the historical father of Belshazzar was Nabonidus, not Nebuchadnezzar. So why is pseudo-scholar silent about this evidence, even tho he accepts the consensus at face value as having implications on how to interpret the story? Could it be that they, as pseudo-scholar would put it, "smack of higher criticism", which in his mind renders an argument null and void? It is not at all dishonest to take an interpretive position critical of higher criticism, but it strikes me as quite odd to both reject higher criticism and yet accept the consensus that results from it as having a bearing on biblical interpretation.
By making such a ludicrous claim, you are going against what the "Slave Class" teaches numb-nuts. Tsk, tsk, tsk......sounds like you're running ahead of the Organization pseudo.........you're just one small step away from becoming a full blown apostate'.
Exactly right, he is suggesting something that the Society itself rejects.
*** w59 8/15 p. 506 par. 25 Part 20—"Your Will Be Done on Earth" ***
The "seven times" that literally passed over King Nebuchadnezzar during his madness at Babylon amounted to seven literal years....Nebuchadnezzar is reported to have reigned for forty-three years. So these "seven times" of insanity in between must have been seven years at the most, in his personal case. In the Holy Bible a "time" is used in places to stand for a literal year.
*** w64 12/15 p. 757 Why the Changes in World Governments Since 1914? ***
This prediction actually befell King Nebuchadnezzar one year later. At a time when Nebuchadnezzar was boasting of his accomplishments in Babylon a voice from heaven announced that the tree dream would now be fulfilled upon him. He was seized with madness such as marks the disease of lycanthropy. Instead of wanting to sit on his throne, he went out into the field to eat grass. His throne was not taken by a usurper, but was held for him by God’s power until his return after “seven times” or seven literal years.
*** w73 11/1 p. 644 The Best Time to Be Alive ***
Babylonian records that have been unearthed provide no account of the fact that Nebuchadnezzar was mad for seven literal years, as the Bible shows to be the case. But would we expect the supporters and servants of a dictator king to record his humiliation? We cannot imagine Hitler’s historians recording Hitler’s defeats if he had returned to power as did Nebuchadnezzar at the end of his seven years' madness. Other nations also have followed the policy of "whitewashing" their rulers and governments, as we can see in the annals of ancient Egypt, Assyria and many modern countries. But the Bible gives us the true, candid, unvarnished historical record.
*** ka chap. 1 pp. 10-11 par. 8 The "Thousand Years"—Not a False Hope ***
It is understandable why what now happened was not preserved for us in the Babylonian historical records, or why any record thereof by a Babylonian chronicler was removed or destroyed. But the honest, true-to-fact prophet Daniel, who was personally implicated in the matter, was inspired to make a record of it, for our consultation more than two and a half millenniums later. The proud King Nebuchadnezzar was instantly smitten with madness—and it was not his most revered god, Marduk (or, Merodach), who smote him. It was the Almighty God who foretold this madness that smote the boastful king, the king who had destroyed the sacred temple at Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E. And, just as predicted and ordained, "seven times" literally did pass over King Nebuchadnezzar while he was insanely chewing at grass like a bull out there in a nearby field.
*** go chap. 5 pp. 81-82 par. 25 Foretelling the Time for World Rulership ***
At that time, as far as the prophetic dream is applied to Nebuchadnezzar himself, the iron and copper bands around the rootstock of the immense tree were snapped and removed. The literal "seven times" were up, and there was due a restoration of the sane king to power. Nebuchadnezzar makes record of this, as he goes on to say: "At the same time my understanding itself began to return to me, and for the dignity of my kingdom my majesty and my brightness themselves began to return to me; and for me even my high royal officers and my grandees began eagerly searching, and I was reestablished upon my own kingdom, and greatness extraordinary was added to me." (Daniel 4:36)
*** kc chap. 14 p. 133 par. 18 The King Reigns! ***
The fact that secular history gives no detailed account of Nebuchadnezzar's seven-year absence from the throne should not be surprising. Ancient records of Egypt, Assyria and Babylon are notorious for their omission of anything that might be embarrassing to the ruler, which is one reason for their not being as reliable as God’s inspired Word. It is God’s Word that assures us that the dream vision was fulfilled.
It is also interesting that the "celebrated WT scholars" have also never mentioned the evidence pertaining to Nabonidus either.
