It seems, Jeffro is still influenced by "Studies in the Scriptures" ;-)
For "seven times" in Leviticus 26 another hebrew word (meaning: sevenfold) is used than for "seven times" in Daniel. See footnote in NWT, Lev 26,18.
Seven times
by Jeffro 29 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Jeffro
It seems, Jeffro is still influenced by "Studies in the Scriptures" ;-)
Not sure how I can be 'influenced' by something I've never read. Or are you suggesting I'm 'anointed'™?
-
Jeffro
For "seven times" in Leviticus 26 another hebrew word (meaning: sevenfold) is used than for "seven times" in Daniel.
Simple comparison of the English translation of these words was not the determining factor, and I am quite aware that they are different original-language terms. There are other similarities in the stories in Leviticus and Daniel. However, the ambiguity of the term rendered times (rather than saying years) in Daniel does lend support to an intention of more than one meaning in the story, such as if the author intended to refer to both the Babylonian story and an account more relevant to the Jews.
-
Leolaia
I certainly did not mean to cause offense, and so I apologize for my wording. When I read:
For how long was Jerusalem desolate (or For how long was the 'tree' in the dream banded)?
It certainly sounded like you were comparing (even conditionally) the period of Jerusalem being desolate after being destroyed in 587 BC with the banding of the tree in the vision, which is why I made the comparison with the JW interpretation, which makes a similar interpretation of the banding of the tree: extending something that the text only has pertaining to the king, and making it pertain in some way to Judah or Jerusalem. I certainly did not mean to insult you and I retract my preceding comment.
-
Jeffro
It certainly sounded like you were comparing (even conditionally) the period of Jerusalem being desolate after being destroyed in 587 BC with the banding of the tree in the vision, which is why I made the comparison with the JW interpretation, which makes a similar interpretation of the banding of the tree: extending something that the text only has pertaining to the king, and making it pertain in some way to Judah or Jerusalem
There was indeed a tentative comparison. Making such a comparison does not call for an attack of 'guilt by association' by comparing with JWs, especially since what I said is plausible, and calls for no 'magical' or 'prophetic' fulfilment, or in fact for anything more than some literary association with existing writings. It is certainly possible for a story to allude to more than one source, and given a Jewish audience, it is certainly possible that it might allude to something relevant to them. There is more reason to suggest that Daniel cryptically wrote about things the Jews had already experienced than to either interpret a 'prophetic' dream or to (only) reproduce a story from prior to the captivity, in view of the fact that Daniel's other writings are generally stories about past (though often framed as future) political regimes that affected the Jews. That's not to say that it must, but there is certainly no basis for a dogmatic claim that it mustn't.
It's a bit like ridiculing someone who says that Ten Things I Hate About You incorporates themes from other teen films because it's obviously an adaptation of Taming of the Shrew, and therefore 'must' 'only' be based on it.
-
yadda yadda 2
Very interesting. Is this an original thought or an interpretation you've seen elsewhere?
What do you think of John Denton's (eschatologically hopeful) interpretation at www.bric.uk.com/Appendix.html#App18 ?
-
Jeffro
Very interesting. Is this an original thought or an interpretation you've seen elsewhere?
I haven't seen it elsewhere. I find it difficult to imagine that no one has made the connection before though.
-
Jeffro
I did a quick search of the forum and didn't find anything specific, though I thought this statement was interesting:
This interpretation of Leviticus expands the 49 years of the jubilee period into 490 years (a multiple of the sacred number 10), just as Daniel expands the 70 years of Jeremiah into 490 years (a multiple of the sacred number 7).
This statement is about a different 'prophecy', though it's interesting that the contributor notes that Daniel elsewhere expands a period by multiplying by the "sacred number 7". It therefore doesn't seem much of a stretch that Daniel might also construe the ambiguous duration of times (which does not mean year in the original language) as years in the borrowed Babylonian story but also imply a different period—"the sacred number 7" (that is the sacred Sabbaths, literally, "sevens")—as a multipler, such that seven times may represent 49 years in reference to Jerusalem.
Whilst I see the appeal of saying the author of Daniel 'can't' be referring to anything other than Nebuchadnezzar's 'dream', to dogmatically insist that it mustn't on the basis that it reminds them of a Watch Tower Society interpretation is little more than an assocation fallacy; there may also be a perception that acknowledging any additional intent in the story might be a slippery slope to 'accepting' the possibility of the Watch Tower Society's interpretation, however that would also be fallacious reasoning.
Those who reject but are stuck on the Watch Tower Society's interpretation may find it distasteful to imagine that the tree might be a metaphor for Jerusalem at all because they can't disconnect the concept from the Society's 'magical' 'prophecy' about alleged future events. However, there is nothing 'mystical' at all in the possibility that the author of Daniel may have made reference to existing writings (Leviticus) about past events (the exile) that were relevant to his audience (Jews).
It's abundantly clear from other stories in Daniel (the seventy weeks, kings of the north and south, etc) that the author does not always openly express his intended meaning (to say the least), so there really isn't a strong basis for suggesting that the story about Nebuchadnezzar's dream cannot allude to anything else.
Of course, the added advantage in the argument is that, unlike the Watch Tower Society, there is no vested interest in it being correct.
-
Calebs Airplane
excellent post!
I always thought the deolation ran from 587 to 537 (50 years)... but 49 is close enough for me...
-
Jeffro
I always thought the deolation ran from 587 to 537 (50 years)... but 49 is close enough for me...
The JW teaching that the Jews returned in 537BCE is a lie.
Temple construction began in the 2nd month of Cyrus’ second regnal year (Iyyar [May] 537 BCE). (Ezra 3:8; Against Apion, Book I, Chapter 21). As Josephus states, the temple "lay in that state of obscurity for fifty years" from 587 until 537BCE.
However, the Jews who responded to Cyrus’ decree to rebuild the temple were “in their cities” in the 7th month of the year before, which was (Tishri [October] 538 BCE) (Ezra 3:1). Their return marked the end of the 'paying off sabbaths', 49 years after 587BCE.
It's important to note that most scholars understand that writing of Leviticus was completed during the Persian period, so there is no requirement for any 'fulfilled prophecies' in any of this, though it works equally well if people want to believe that it does.
Ezra 3:1:
When the seventh month arrived the sons of Israel were in [their] cities. And the people began to gather themselves as one man to Jerusalem.
Ezra 3:8:
And in the second year of their coming to the house of the [true] God at Jerusalem, in the second month, Zerub′babel the son of Sheal′tiel and Jesh′ua the son of Jehoz′adak and the rest of their brothers, the priests and the Levites, and all those who had come out of the captivity to Jerusalem started; and they now put in positions the Levites from twenty years of age upward to act as supervisors over the work of the house of Jehovah.
Against Apion, Book I, chapter 21:
These accounts agree with the true histories in our books; for in them it is written that Nebuchadnezzar, in the eighteenth year of his reign, laid our temple desolate, and so it lay in that state of obscurity for fifty years; but that in the second year of the reign of Cyrus its foundations were laid, and it was finished again in the second year of Darius.
Note that Josephus doesn't count accession years when referring to either Nebuchadnezzar or Cyrus (similarly, compare Jeremiah 52:12 & 2 Kings 25:8 with the Babylonian interpolation at Jeremiah 52:29).
The JW's Insight on the Scriptures (volume 1, p. 568) acknowledges:
Babylonian custom would place Cyrus’ first regnal year as running from Nisan [April] of 538 to Nisan of 537 B.C.E.