Posts by John Kesler

18

Matthew 10:23

by pixel in

"23when they persecute ?you?

in one city, flee to another; for truly i say to ?you, you?

will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of israel until the son of man arrives.".

John Kesler

Leolaia wrote: John....No, I'm not the debating type. I'm more discussion oriented. I'll mention later on if you wish the problem I find with preterism (which does do justice in part with early Jewish/Christian eschatological expectation), but I'm off in a few minutes to see the Hobbit.

I was hoping to have a Leolaia post for Christmas. One problem with the preterist view is that it, like the futurist-view, rests on a misidentification of Daniel's fourth kingdom as Rome instead of Greece. Without a proper understanding of the book of Daniel, no eschatology can be correct, even if one views the Bible as authoritative.

18

Matthew 10:23

by pixel in

"23when they persecute ?you?

in one city, flee to another; for truly i say to ?you, you?

will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of israel until the son of man arrives.".

John Kesler

Leolaia, yes, I'd like your thoughts. I've studied preterism, and I have my own views about its problems, but I'd like to see your take.

18

Matthew 10:23

by pixel in

"23when they persecute ?you?

in one city, flee to another; for truly i say to ?you, you?

will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of israel until the son of man arrives.".

John Kesler

Leolaia, do you have any archived debates with preterists? Would you consider challenging J.P. Holding to a debate on preterism?

18

Matthew 10:23

by pixel in

"23when they persecute ?you?

in one city, flee to another; for truly i say to ?you, you?

will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of israel until the son of man arrives.".

John Kesler

Aside from the fact that Matthew 10:23 anticipates the return the "Son of Man" in the lifetime of Jesus' hearers, the promise that this would occur before the apostles had "gone through all the towns of Israel" conflicts with Matthew 24:14, which says that, "this good news of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the world, as a testimony to all the nations; and then the end will come."

24

Evidence regarding Daniel 11 & Antiochus IV

by Bobcat in

i was doing research on daniel 8 and 11. what i was wondering was if there was any evidence that the jews saw daniel 8 and 11 fulfilled in antiochus iv.. the explained fulfillments (re: antiochus; non-wt explanations) make a lot of sense, but what specifically i was wondering was if the jews (after the time of antiochus iv) saw the daniel prophecies as being fulfilled in him?

or if there are any threads that discuss this, a link would be appreciated.. thank you in advance.. take care.

John Kesler

John Kesler: Why didn't the author of 1 Maccabees also claim that Antiochus IV died in Palestine, unless he didn't view Daniel 11:45b as dependent on 11:45a regarding the place of death? Instead, the author states in 6:1-16 that Antiochus died in Persia. Also, do I understand correctly that you think the pagan altar was erected in 168 B.C.? I thought 1 Macc. 1:54 dates it to 167? Thanks for your insights.

Leolaia: I don't think the author was basing his account on Daniel; he was writing an account mostly of happenings in Judea. The story of the death of Antiochus is clearly fictional (reminiscent of the repentance of Manasseh), and while the author may have known some details (such as where he died) he may not have known others (such as the time of year). There is a definite uncertainty about the timing of Antiochus' death when you compare the two accounts 1 Maccabees and 2 Maccabees. The latter (the more unreliable account) had moved many events preceding Antiochus' death to the period after his death, moving the date of the death to a point several months earlier in time. Probably the author was just confused and the similarity in timing with Daniel is just a coincidence. Or possibly there was influence from ch. 11-12 of Daniel. It is interesting that the legendary account of Antiochus' death has the king at that moment intending to return to Judea and massacre the whole population of Jerusalem.

Thanks for this. Since you doubt that the author of 1 Maccabees used Daniel as a source regarding the death of Antiochus, do you think that the use of "desolating sacrilege" (so NRSV), so similar to the wording of Daniel 9:27 and 11:31, is also independent of Daniel? If not, since the death of Antiochus is, as you say, "clearly fictional" as reported in 1 Maccabees, why not say that Antiochus died in Palestine to bring the account in line with Daniel? Is there anything grammatically in the Hebrew that requires that Palestine be understood as the place of Antiochus's death in Daniel 11:45b just because that's where 45a says that's where he "pitch[ed] his palatial tents" (NRSV)? I know that most mainstream commentators say that Palestine is predicted in Daniel 11 as the place of Antiochus's death, but I don't see that the text requires that. What am I missing?

24

Evidence regarding Daniel 11 & Antiochus IV

by Bobcat in

i was doing research on daniel 8 and 11. what i was wondering was if there was any evidence that the jews saw daniel 8 and 11 fulfilled in antiochus iv.. the explained fulfillments (re: antiochus; non-wt explanations) make a lot of sense, but what specifically i was wondering was if the jews (after the time of antiochus iv) saw the daniel prophecies as being fulfilled in him?

or if there are any threads that discuss this, a link would be appreciated.. thank you in advance.. take care.

John Kesler

Leolaia: Also 1 Maccabees 1:54 (late second century BC) refers to the pagan altar installed in the Temple as the "abomination of desolation", using the same language found in Daniel. Bear in mind that the author expected the king to die in a different way than what really happened...

Why didn't the author of 1 Maccabees also claim that Antiochus IV died in Palestine, unless he didn't view Daniel 11:45b as dependent on 11:45a regarding the place of death? Instead, the author states in 6:1-16 that Antiochus died in Persia. Also, do I understand correctly that you think the pagan altar was erected in 168 B.C.? I thought 1 Macc. 1:54 dates it to 167? Thanks for your insights.

30

So we are created in God's Image and expected to freely forgive those who trespass against us..so why doesn't HE?

by StoneWall in

we kinda all know the scriptures about freely forgiving those who trespass(sin) against us and jesus words about forgiving up to seventy-seven times etc... then we take into account how god hates two sets of scales to measure with: (quotes from nwt).

proverbs 20:23 " two sorts of weights are something detestable to jehovah, and a cheating pair of scales is not good.. proverbs 20:10 " two sorts of weights and two sorts of ephah measuresthey are both of them together something detestable to jehovah.. so my question is this.

why not lead by example?.

John Kesler

StoneWall said: It was only one trespass that got Moses in hot water and not allowed to enter the promised land. (Failure to give God credit for bringing forth water from the rocks etc.)

Why was Moses not allowed into the promised land? Was it because of his own disobedience (Numbers 20:10-12; 27:12-13; Deut. 32:48-52), or was he punished vicariously because of the Israelites' transgressions (Deut.1:34-37; 3:21-27;4:20-22)?

The passages which indicate that Moses suffered vicariously not only don't mention any culpability on Moses' part, they explicitly say that Moses paid the price for the sins of others:

Deuteronomy 3:24-26
24 "O Lord God, you have only begun to show your servant your greatness and your might; what god in heaven or on earth can perform deeds and mighty acts like yours! 25 Let me cross over to see the good land beyond the Jordan, that good hill country and the Lebanon." 26 But Yahweh was angry with me ON YOUR ACCOUNT and would not heed me. Yahweh said to me, "Enough from you! Never speak to me of this matter again!

Deuteronomy 4:20-21
20 But Yahweh has taken you and brought you out of the iron-smelter, out of Egypt, to become a people of his very own possession, as you are now. 21 Yahweh was angry with me BECAUSE OF YOU, and he vowed that I should not cross the Jordan and that I should not enter the good land that Yahweh your God is giving for your possession.

52

How credible is the dating of Daniel?

by itsibitsybrainbutbigenoughtosmellarat in

for example the hairy he-goat is very precise?

i have read some works on the subject but would like your input..

John Kesler

brokethechain, if you want an easy-to-read book about Daniel, I highly recommend Brodrick D. Shepherd's Beasts, Horns and the Antichrist: Daniel : A Blueprint of the Last Days. The title notwithstanding, the book does not interpret Daniel as a book about the "last days" of the 20th or 21st centuries. Rather, it draws on scholarly consensus about the book's dating and original intent. You can read it for free here.

52

How credible is the dating of Daniel?

by itsibitsybrainbutbigenoughtosmellarat in

for example the hairy he-goat is very precise?

i have read some works on the subject but would like your input..

John Kesler

Christ Alone wrote: Regarding the Dead Sea Scrolls, eight copies of Daniel were found at the Qumran community with one copy dated to 125 BCE using carbon dating techniques. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that Daniel was written in 165 BCE. Would people living in 165 BCE accept Daniel as a prophet if Daniel was written at that time? Would Daniel be renowned as a prophet if it were known that he had lived a mere 40 years earlier? In that event, he would have been a contemporary person writing fiction. Refer to "The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible" translated and with commentary by Martin Abegg, Jr., Peter Flint & Eugene Ulrich, 1999, page 484.

I'm not sure why you refer to this work to help your cause. I quote from The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible pages 484-485 below, with my emphasis:

Was the book of Daniel quoted or referred to in other writings of Qumran? Since Daniel was not written until about 165 BCE, it would be surprising to find it used in this way—yet this is precisely the case. 11QMelchizedek, for example refers to the "Anointed of the Spirit, of whom Daniel spoke" (Dan 9:25-26). The quotation of Daniel 12:10 as from the "book of Daniel the Prophet" in the Florilegium, referred to above, is significant for three reasons:

· "It proves that by 25 BCE Daniel was already being quoted as scripture.

· "It shows that the author(s) of the Florilegium knew Daniel as a complete book. They were not simply using traditions about Daniel that may have been circulating before the book was written.

· "It suggests that Qumran Daniel was included among the Prophets and not among the writings (see above).

...It is not difficult to understand why this late book had achieved such prominence in so short a time if we consider its contents and the outlook of the Qumran community. An apocalyptic community such as they were, waiting in the desert for the end of the age, would have found such a book very appealing and significant. With its focus on the end of history, the triumph of good over evil, God's coming kingdom, and the vindication of those who remain righteous and faithful, Daniel was no doubt essential reading for many of the Qumran covenanters.

15

If a scripture can be shown that Jehovah God "changes" his mind then are we to believe anything he says in the bible?

by booker-t in

i have always been taught that jehovah god never changes his mind and he always carries out what he predicts.

then a friend of mine who is atheist showed me a scripture in the bible that caught me totally off guard.

it is in the book of jeremiah.

John Kesler

It seems to me that not only does He change His mind, but He then regrets His original action as well, e.g;

Gen 6:6-7

Ex 32:14

1 Sam 15:10-11

2 Sam 24:15-16.

You may want to read chapter seven, page 107 ff of James Kugel's book How To Read The Bible, which discusses the "two models of God." As Kugel points out, the earlier conception of God--found in narratives in Genesis, Exodus, Joshua, and Judges--is an anthropomorphic one of a deity who has a body and is not omniscient and omnispresent. The latter perception often gets read into the former.