Simple Question Re 1914

by Slidin Fast 540 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

scholar

Disillusioned JW
scholar, why do you think the book of Daniel says "seal up the book" of Daniel? If you think the book was sealed, when do you think it became unsealed? Do you think it was unsealed in the 2nd century B.C.E.? Do you think it was sealed centuries earlier than the 2nd century B.C.E.? In contrast, why do you think the book of Revelation says "do not seal up" the book of Revelation? What are your reasons?
---
The reason for sealing up the book of Daniel was simply to show that it would only be understood or revealed at a much later time as it was beyond human understanding onlt to be revealed to the 'holy ones'-'those having insight' Dan. 12:3. Such a future time of revelation would be as Dan 12:1 when Michael would stand up was from 1914 CE.
Daniel from its time of composition in the 6th century BCE remained sealed right through until 1914 CE The reason why Daniel was to remain sealed right up to the appointed time for its disclosure from 1914 CE and that Revelation was not to be sealed during the appointed time- Rev. 22:10 shows a different context in time and purpose. Daniel was written for a future purpose as prophecy Revelation was written for the 'Lord's Day' beginning in 1914 CE and during that time its contents were to be publicised as shown by the Bible Students preaching its content.
---
Do you think the references in the two books about "seal up" or "do not seal up" (as the case may be) provide clues as when the two books were written?
--
Most definitely. In the case of Daniel such a commandment 'to seal up' proves it was a book of prophecy written at the time the dreams and visions were received which are dated historically. Revelation is also a similar apocalyptic genre in the prophecy given at a future specified time of its revealing which has been calculated to be 1914 CE based on the 'Gentile Times' mentioned in Dan.4.
---
When do you think chapters 3-14 of the book of 2nd Esdras (the book that is referred to at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_Esdras ) were written, and do you think the biblical Ezra wrote them? [Esdras is a Greco-Latin variation of the Hebrew name 'Ezra'.] What are your reasons?
---
2 Esdras also known as the 'Apocalypse of Ezra' or '4 Ezra' was written in the last decade of the 1st century CE.so Ezra the Jewish historian could not have written such an apocalypse.
--
Why do you believe that Porphyry having been a critic of Christianity invalidates
Porphyry and his criticism of the the Book of Daniel? Why couldn't his criticism of the book of Daniel be correct, despite his criticism of Christianity? Do you believe that the WT's criticism of the Catholic church and of Christendom invalidates the WT and its criticism of the books which Protestants call Apocryphal but which the Roman Catholic Church calls parts of the Bible (such as the books of Tobit, Judith, and Ecclesiasticus [the latter is also called the Book of Sirach])? What are you reasons
--
Well at the very least one would question his motive and whether his proofs or thesis stands up to a critical examination. His criticism must be based on facts so what were his facts? Christendom has endorsed other Apocryphal books which have been added to the Bible Canon so that is a matter for such bodies but their inclusion again demands scrutiny and WT has certainly made such a criticism. The contents of such books tells their own story and it is on this basis alone that canonicity is established.
scholar JW
Jeffro

‘scholar’:
The Roman Empire came into existence long after Daniel was written with the advent of Augustus Caesar in 27 BCE which was foretold and described in Dan.11:20 thus proving that Rome existed long after Daniel's time of writing in the 6th century BC.
Wrong as usual. Daniel 11:20 alludes to Heliodorus being sent (around 178 BCE) by Seleucus IV Philopator (ruled 187 - 175 BCE) to demand a tax from Jerusalem’s temple treasures, hence an exactor. It has nothing at all to do with a census (that the author of Luke places in the wrong year) that would not require people returning to the place of their birth anyway.
scholar

Jeffro
The movie Alien contains chronological data ‘proving’ the movie was made hundreds of years in the future 🤦‍♂️ Must be a prophecy 😂
Can you really be so stupid to genuinely not understand that someone can very easily refer to events in the past at some later time?
--
That is your opinion for the simple fact is that the book of Daniel in its entirety contains regnal data which can be dated in terms of history and chronology giving the time when specific events occurred. Such data is consistent with constructing a history of that period. if there was no such data then the whole account could be termed as a myth or of a later time of writing such as the 2hd century BC consistent with your interpretation.
The presence of those six regnal data conclusively proves that Daniel contains or describes events in the sixth century thus it can be reasonably assumed that the time of composition was of that time unless proved otherwise. So you produce cogent facts that prove a 2nd-century composition.
scholar JW
Jeffro

‘scholar’:
In the case of Daniel such a commandment 'to seal up' proves it was a book of prophecy written at the time the dreams and visions were received which are dated historically.
‘Sealing the book’ could be a literary device ‘explaining’ why the book ‘appeared’ only during the 2nd century BCE. But Daniel 10:27 refers to a different book to the one at Daniel 12:1.
Jeffro

‘scholar’:
So you produce cogent facts that prove a 2nd-century composition.
You already did:
reference applicable to the Seleucid Period is confined to a few verses in Dan. 11:5-19
Of course, the entire remainder of chapter 11 also refers to the Seleucid period, along with other references in chapters 2, 7 & 8, but I have low expectations about the quality of your responses anyway.
scholar

Jeffro
You already did:
--
Only a small section in Dan.11
---
Of course, the entire remainder of chapter 11 is also refers to the Seleucid period, along with other references in chapters 2, 7 & 8, but I have low expectations about the quality of your responses anyway.
---
Nope. The remainder of Dan. 11 pertains to the Roman Empire.
I am still awaiting your proof that the entire book was of 2nd century BC composition and deals wholly with the Seleucids.
scholar JW
Jeffro

‘scholar’:
The remainder of Dan. 11 pertains to the Roman Empire.
Well that’s wrong even according to JW nonsense. But no, no part of Daniel refers to the Roman Empire.
I am still awaiting your proof that the entire book was of 2nd century BC composition and deals wholly with the Seleucids.
Already provided. But I also already said that some of the stories are adapted from older tales (for example the story supposedly told by Nebuchadnezzar in chapter 4 incorporates details from The Prayer of Nabonidus). I also never claimed that it “deals wholly with the Seleucids”, as it also contains details about the Neo-Babylonian, Achmaenid and Macedonian periods.
Disillusioned JW

Thanks scholar for mentioning "former Witness Semitic scholar, Rolf Furuli in his When Was The Book Of Daniel Written? A Philological, Linguistic, And Historical Approach". I am trying to find online information about the book. I found some information about the author and discovered that in 2020 (while he was an elder at the time) he published a book which criticized the Governing Body of the JW. He was disfellowshipped by the GB after he offered his book to them for them to read and implement the urged changes mentioned in his book. He didn't publish the book until after the GB rejected the idea of changing their ways and until after the GB disfellowshipped him. https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/hfrzc3/rolf_furuli_publishes_a_written_statement_to/ has an interesting post about this, called "Rolf Furuli publishes a written statement to Norwegian newspaper." In part, that post says the following.
"As an elder, I am trained to do something about things I see in the congregation that are contrary to the Bible. Now I have uncovered many things at the top of the organization that are contrary to the Bible. When I try to do something about this, I have a good conscience. And a good conscience can withstand all kinds of pressure. After publishing, I have received hundreds of emails - many from men who have recently renounced the assignment as elders, because for their conscience they can no longer represent GB, and from elders who are deeply concerned about the development of the organization. I will keep in touch with these."
See also Furuli's web page at https://mybelovedreligion.no/about/ ("My Beloved Religion - And The Governing Body"). It says in part the following.
'The first Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses (GB) was instituted in 1971, and the arrangement of a body of elders in each congregation was instituted in 1972. The bodies of elders were, to a great degree, independent of the GB, and they made their own decisions to the best of the congregation members. After some time, some of the power of the bodies of elders were transferred to the GB, and this was completed in the 21st century. In this way, the organization got their “bishops” and their “clergy.”
Today, the GB functions as a government for JW. The members of the GB have all power over the doctrines, the assets, and the money. The GB demands absolute obedience, and those who are not obedient to their rules and decisions are disfellowshipped. Today, the organization is autocratic, and its structure resembles the structure of the Catholic Church.'
Disillusioned JW

In the article on his web site he also says the following 'During the last part of the 20th century and particularly in the 21st century, the GB has made a great number of laws and rules that are not based on the Bible. For example, 32 of the 43 disfellowshipping offenses that are mentioned in the book for elders, “Shepherd the flock of God” have no Bible basis. ... Jehovah God has taught me through his organization to show courage and never shrink back when I see something that is wrong in the organization, also in situations that will harm me if I speak up. The position of the members of the GB and a great number of their decisions violate the Bible. Because of this, I wrote the book My Beloved Religion—And The Governing Body. ... Everyone who is not obedient to the GB will be disfellowshipped, and in June of 2020, I was disfellowshipped. The members of the judicial committee had not seen or read my book, so their decision was made on hearsay, which even is contrary to the rules of the GB.'
Disillusioned JW

Jeffro, I wasn't just indicating that I had a hard time finding religious Jewish commentaries on the book of Daniel. t was saying that I had a hard time finding religious Jewish commentaries on the Hebrew Bible, or on any sections of it.
When I go to the books section of thrift stores (Including the large bins of books often found at the local Goodwill Outlet stores) I find far more Christian religious books than Jewish religious books. Furthermore, most of the Jewish religious books I find (other than Jewish OT Bibles and prayer books) are about religious rituals, rather than books teaching theological doctrine or explanation, explaining verses in the OT, or explaining Bible prophecy. Years ago in a thrift store I found a few Jewish OT Scriptures commentaries in English at a thrift store. I think there are some Jewish OT Scripture commentaries in a local large book store, and perhaps I will go there to read such books there. But for now I prefer to find and read some (in English, not in Hebrew) online, but so far I found virtually none online.
The WT has written that about the year 30 C.E. a number of Jews were expecting the arrival of the Jewish Messiah, and that such expectations were based upon their calculations of the 70 weeks prophecy in the book of Daniel. [Is that a false teaching of the WT or were Jews back then really doing such?] If some of the ancient Jews were doing such, then that shows that a number of early first century Jews considered the book of Daniel to be prophetic - even though the book was classified in the Writings or would later be classified in the Writings. I have long thought (and even still think it is likely) that the WT is correct in saying that a number of very early first century C.E. Jews made calculations of the 70 weeks prophecy, and that as a result of doing such they were anticipating the arrival of the Messiah around the year 30 C.E.
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/world/middleeast/06stone.html is an interesting news article which is related to the above. The title of the article is "Ancient Tablet Ignites Debate on Messiah and Resurrection". It says in part the following.
'Much of the text, a vision of the apocalypse transmitted by the angel Gabriel, draws on the Old Testament, especially the prophets Daniel, Zechariah and Haggai.
... Mr. Knohl contends that the stone’s writings are about the death of a leader of the Jews who will be resurrected in three days.
He says further that such a suffering messiah is very different from the traditional Jewish image of the messiah as a triumphal, powerful descendant of King David.
“This should shake our basic view of Christianity,” he said as he sat in his office of the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem where he is a senior fellow in addition to being the Yehezkel Kaufman Professor of Biblical Studies at Hebrew University. “Resurrection after three days becomes a motif developed before Jesus, which runs contrary to nearly all scholarship. What happens in the New Testament was adopted by Jesus and his followers based on an earlier messiah story.” '
See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah_ben_Joseph .
----------
https://jwtalk.net/topic/32011-rolf-furuli-new-book/ gives a summary of Rolf Furuli's book called When Was The Book Of Daniel Written? In part it says the following.
"6. Antiochus IV Epiphanes All the verses in chapters 7, 8, and 11 in Daniel that are believed to describe the history of Antiochus are discussed in detail. It is shown that modern Bible translators manipulate their translation of some verses, so they fit the history of Antiochus. It is also shown that the few sources that describe the actions of Antiochus are contradictory, and these sources are to some extent manipulated as well. The conclusion of the chapter, contrary to the almost universal agreement, is that Antiochus is not referred to anywhere in the Book of Daniel.
... The setting of the the book of Daniel is God's kingdom, and not the actions of Antiochus."

Simple Question Re 1914

Share this