Daniel 9:24-27 records the answer to Daniel’s prayer by Angel Gabriel. Interpretations of these verses have resulted in a wide range of interpretations.
My suggestions are intended to provide parameters that may assist when an attempt is made to unearth the meaning of Gabriel’s answer.
http://www.jwstudies.com/Decree_or_not.pdf
I will appreciate any comments and advice. Doug
Re Gabriel's answer at Daniel 9
by Doug Mason 9 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
Doug Mason
-
Larsinger58
I read your document. Nicely done.
I especially appreciated that "dabar" means simply "word."
Thus "decree" is definitely a mistranslation and misguided interpretation for when the "seventy weeks" are to begin. So what does it refer to?
It refers to the actual "word" that is uttered to actually begin the work, which occurred on the 1st day of the 7th month. That is, just as today when major building projects are begun, they have sort of a groundbreaking ceremony to officially begin the work. This is the "word" that goes forth to rebuild Jerusalem.
Thus the "70 weeks" clearly begin in the 7th month of the 1st of Cyrus when the actual work of rebuilding Jerusalem started. It is amazing that even the astronomy for lunar month of Tishri 455 BCE matches the same lunar-solar date in 29 CE when Jesus began his ministry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoG7Dn82RYA
There is a critical criticism though. In your document you mention that Cyrus did not specifically decree to rebuild the city, but only the temple. This has been a technicality used by some to shift the fulfillment away from Cyrus, somehow excluding the rebuilding of the temple from Jerusalem. However, Josephus records a secular decree by Cyrus which does command the rebuilding of both the temple and the city. This needs to be part of your document. It is found in Antiquities 11.1.3
"Cyrus also sent an epistle to the governors that were in Syria, the contents whereof here follow:
“KING CYRUS TO SISINNES AND SATHRABUZANES SENDETH GREETING.
"I have given leave to as many of the Jews that dwell in my country as please to return to their own country, and to rebuild their city, and to build the temple of God at Jerusalem on the same place where it was before."
So even though the "word" (dabar) at Daniel 9 is the actual word to begin the rebuilding and not a formal "decree" from any king, this secular reference clearly shows that Cyrus did not simply order a temple in the middle of ruins to be built, but the city as well, obviously. So this closes that "loophole" many like to introduce regarding Cyrus not fulfilling Daniel since he only ordered the rebuilding of the temple and not the "city."
LS
-
Larsinger58
Your statement to seems seems to try to establish that there was no formal decree from Cyrus to rebuild the city. That contradicts the secular record of a specific edit.
Your statement:
Had there been a general edict, the Jews certainly would have retained a copy of it.
The language of these two verses fits the language of a building inscription; it
does not fit the language or idioms of an official Persian edict.
As I quoted above, there is a record of an official Persian edict, apparently. Perhaps you should include this reference to be comprehensive when considering this option.
However, as I also noted before, I believe the "word" (dabar) in reference here has nothing to do with any official decree by Cyrus but the specific timing of when the actual work was ordered to begin thus setting a specific time when the 70 weeks begins. In other words, if Cyrus made the decree in his 1st year then you have a generalized time for this prophecy to begin. But if it is the actual word to begin to rebuild, which happened on the 1st day of the 7th month, then that is more specific for when the prophecy needs to be fulfilled making it month-specific vs year-specific.
Is that an important issue in regards to the prophecy? YES! Because the messiah has to "end gift and sacrifice" and thus die in the middle of the week. The middle of a week is 3.5 years and it happens specifically at Passover time. So this is really a month-specific prophecy which must begin in the 7th month.
Thus the Festival of Booths celebrates when Christ begins his ministry and arrives, and Passover celebrates when he leaves after a 3.5-year ministry. The FOB and Passover Festival are like bookends to Christ's 3.5 years ministry. This is another reason why the "word" that begins this prophecy is the actual word used to begin the actual work and not a general "decree" which is not month-specific.
Thus an additional note in your presentation should address the meaning of the Festival of Booths, that theme being when God comes down to dwell with mankind, that is, being represented by the messiah arriving at this time of the year. Passover represents the time when he is sacrificed, 3.5 years later. So it all works. It all comes together, when the "word goes forth to rebuild Jerusalem" is the actual order to begin the actual work on the 1st day of the 7th month.
When this is added to the context of Isa that says Cyrus would rebuild both the city and temple, there is no other choice here but to date the 1st of Cryus to 455 BCE, which we now have the secular evidence to support that dating. Trying to have this prophecy fulfilled at any other time simply contradicts too many scriptural points of reference. 455 BCE must date the 1st of Cyrus to be Biblically accurate. I don't believe there is any other credible choice.
LS
-
-
Leolaia
Doug Mason.....Good work, the common translation as "decree" is a (non-literal) overtranslation motivated by the interpretation that seeks to associate it with the decree of Artaxerxes. Contextually, we can see that the author most likely has a divine oracle from Yahweh in view. The phrase "going forth of the word" (mtsh dbr) in v. 25 is preceded in v. 23 by an identical expression "a word went forth" (ytsh dbr) which refers to the interpretation of Jeremiah's 70 years given in v. 25-27, which the angel Gabriel delivers to Daniel. This is a divine "word" that the angel brings down from heaven. It is also primarily an oral rather than a written word (as in a written proclamation), as the expression in its fuller form is "going forth of a word from my/one's mouth" (cf. Isaiah 45:23, 55:11; cf. 48:3). The reference of the word of Yahweh "going forth" (ytsh) also occurs in Isaiah 2:3, Ezekiel 33:30, etc. The original oracle in Jeremiah concerning the seventy years is similarly designated as a divine "word" in v. 2, "the word of Yahweh that came to Jeremiah (dbr yhwh 'shr hyh 'l-yrmyhw)", a phrase that is directly taken from Jeremiah (cf. Jeremiah 1:2, 4, 11, 13, 2:1, 13:3, 8, 14:1, 16:1, 18:5, 24:4, 25:3, 28:12, 29:30, 32:6, 26, 33:1, 19, 23, 34:12, etc.). This is probably the "word to restore and rebuild" referred to in v. 25. Notice the wording in Jeremiah 29:10: "When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will come to you and graciously fulfill my word to restore (dbry l-hshyb) you back to this place". The "word to restore and rebuild" (dbr l-hshyb wl-bnwt) in Daniel 9:25 is thus allusive of the seventy years prophecy in Jeremiah, the very oracle that ch. 9 of Daniel is concerned with. The following chapter of Jeremiah continues the theme; v. 1 introduces "the word that came to Jeremiah from Yahweh", v. 2 promises that Yahweh will "restore" (hshbtym) his people to their land, v. 18 repeats the promise that Yahweh "will restore" (shb) the fortunes of Judah and "the city will be rebuilt" (nbnth `yr). Again in 31:38-40, the "word of Yahweh" promises that "the city will be rebuilt" (nbnth h-`yr). And finally in ch. 32, dated to the tenth year of Zedekiah when Nebuchadnezzar was besieging Jerusalem, the "word that came to Jeremiah from Yahweh" promises that "I will restore them (hshbytm) back to this place and let them live in safety" (v. 1, 28-29, 37).
-
Larsinger58
DOUG
Lars,
Have you read:
http://www.jwstudies.com/Fried_Conquest_and_Restoration.pdf
Doug
Thanks. I read over this material. She thinks Ezra 4's reference to "Artaxerxes" is a reference to Artaxerxes I and thus uses that misconception to help date this material. She doesn't realize that this "Artaxerxes" is a reference to the successor of Kambyses (called "Ahasuerus" in Ezra) is Bardiya-Smerdis. It was during his reign the work was stopped until the 2nd of Darius when the work began again.
I think such a huge miss would tend to taint this commentary. Strange though, because even the WTS understands this is Bardiya-Smerdis and other scholarly references for Artaxerxes sometimes calls Artaxerxes, Longimanus, Artaxerxes II rather than I because of this previous Artaxerxes.
Thanks for the reference.
LS
-
moggy lover
Nice work, Doug.
You have a PM.
-
Doug Mason
Moggy Lover,
I finally have responded to your pm.
Doug
-
Doug Mason
Lars,
When you read that article by Fried, I wanted you to note her comments regarding the dating of the dedication of the altar in the "seventh month".
When the WTS end the "70 Years" with that event, they say it occurred during Cyrus' first year. Fried, however, says that this undated verse is misplaced, and that the dedication of the altar took place several years later.
A major thrust of her piece is that the words of the "decree" that appear in Scripture are taken from an inscription at the temple. This would address the major discrepancies between those words and the words on the Cyrus Cylinder.
Doug
-
Doug Mason
Leolaia,
I want to thank you for your skill and knowledge and for the fact that you readily share your knowledge with all.
I am indebted to you, once more.
Doug