Hiddenservant, the future of Jerusalem is absolutely part of the prophecy. View it as a case of cause and effect. Jerusalem and the temple would become irrelevant when Jesus presented his superior sacrifice to his Father. He would prolong the covenant for Jew and Samaritan for one week (Dan. 9:27a). At the half of the week he would cause sacrifice and offerings to cease (Dan. 9:27b; Heb. 9:12; 10:12 NET). Thus, from that moment onwards Jerusalem would lose its privilege to be the city of the great king (cf. Matt. 5:35). The temple precint and the sacrifices offered there would also become irrelevant. The emphasis would now fall of Mount Zion of heavenly Jerusalem (Hebr. 12:22). So whether the demise of Jerusalem and the temple happened within the week or not, these would play no further part in God's purpose.
Posts by Vidqun
-
23When will the Watchtower Society be desolated?
by Hiddenservant indid you know that the answer is provided in the scriptures through the 70 weeks prophecy?.
daniel’s 70 weeks prophecy explained.. the 70 weeks were split into three parts.
here is the reason why.. the prophecy is not only about the messiah, it is also about god’s people and the holy city, as verse 24 makes clear.
-
-
-
23
When will the Watchtower Society be desolated?
by Hiddenservant indid you know that the answer is provided in the scriptures through the 70 weeks prophecy?.
daniel’s 70 weeks prophecy explained.. the 70 weeks were split into three parts.
here is the reason why.. the prophecy is not only about the messiah, it is also about god’s people and the holy city, as verse 24 makes clear.
-
-
Vidqun
Quite a few scholars suggest that the seventy weeks of Daniel should be split in 69 weeks + 1 week. After 69 weeks of years had elapsed, the Messiah will appear. He will then be cut off with nothing for himself (Dan. 9:24-26a). The final week of seven years, these insist, will only take place during the Great Tribulation, the leader or prince being a false messiah or antichrist (Dan. 9:26b, 27).
A major obstacle, contradicting such a view, is the use of masculine “weeks” in the Hebrew text of Dan. 9:24. This means that the seventy weeks should be viewed as a unit, and not as individual fragments. The Seventy Weeks Prophecy has all to do with the first appearance of the Messiah and the siege of Jerusalem (cf. Luke 21:20-22).
Hebrew "sevens" or "weeks": שָׁבעֻיִם . The noun שָׁבעֻיִם ("weeks") in Daniel 9:24 is masculine plural. Only in Daniel does the masculine plural of this word occur (9:24, 25 [twice], 26; 10:2, 3); elsewhere in the Old Testament the feminine plural is used. As has been documented by major biblical Hebrew grammars, in cases of double-gender plurals the masculine ending ים ◌ִ—stresses totality, fullness, wholeness, and entirety, whereas the feminine plural ending וֹת —stresses constituent parts. Thus, according to Hasel (following Joüon and Muraoka), שׂ דֶָח ("field") with the feminine plural ending means "individual fields, individual farms," whereas with the masculine plural ending it has the more comprehensive sense of "fields, countryside" in a more unitary sense. Likewise, the noun אֲלמֻּ ה ("sheaf") with the masculine plural ending refers to sheaves in general, whereas with the feminine plural ending it refers to individual sheaves. Applying this distinction to Daniel 9:24, one would expect that since the masculine plural ending is used the seventy weeks are viewed as a total unit, stressing completeness and unity. The feminine form, on the other hand, would have emphasized the individual weeks of the period under discussion. This emphasis on totality in turn helps explain why the verb "has been determined" in verse 24 is singular, even though the subject ("weeks") is plural. On the basis of the morphology of the plural ending of the word "weeks" Hasel says, "It is inappropriate from the linguistic and syntactical point of view to separate the sum total of the ‘seventy-week’ period of time into sixty-nine weeks that are continuous and a last week that is separated from them by a ‘gap,’ ‘parenthesis,’ or some other time element which places the seventieth week in the future" (p. 118). Rather, he states, "the masculine plural form šāb̠uʿîm in Dan 9:24 is employed to emphasize the sum total of the ‘seventy weeks’ as a complete and uninterrupted span of time" (p. 117).
Daniel’s Seventy Weeks Prophecy predicts the appearance of the Messiah on earth as Jehovah God’s king designate. It also envisages the destruction of the Jewish system by the Romans, and the levelling of Jerusalem and its temple. It has to do with the suffering of the Jews in 70 CE. Jesus did compare conditions in Jerusalem during the Roman siege to conditions on earth during the Great Tribulation (Luke 21:20-25). The suffering of the Jews trapped in Jerusalem could be viewed as a precedent of what is to come.
"The Hebrew Masculine Plural for ‘Weeks’ in the Expression ‘Seventy Weeks’ in Daniel 9:24," Gerhard F. Hasel, Andrews University Seminary Studies 31 (1993): pp. 105-118.
-
-
-
Vidqun
Riley, if you are up to date with your vaccine program, you should be on your 9th booster by now, that is according to CDC guidelines. Why do you think that is? That's because you don't get herd immunity by vaccinating people during an endemic. You get herd immunity by not vaccinating. Those with good natural immunity sterilizes the virus. No virus means no transmission. Leaky vaccines cause variants to arise and mRNA producers can never keep up with the new variants. They will always be one step behind.These do not stop transmission either. What did stop the virus was Omicron, a mild but dominating variant with flu symptoms. Nothing to do with mRNA vaccines.
Just throwing it out there for Riley.
-
56
Old Greek Daniel's Son of Man
by peacefulpete inagain this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site.
the basic question i want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in daniel 7. as we all know christians understood the figure to be the messiah (christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of israel as jews typically read it?
or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?.
-
-
Vidqun
Boccur makes an interesting case. But he'll have to do better than that to convince me to substitute an OG reading for a MT reading. There's a reason why Theodotion's version of Daniel supplanted the OG version. And if we get into the identity of Father and Son and the Trinitarian controversy, that would take us into the first few Christian centuries, which is very late in the game. Here's Dan. 7:13, 14 in the Gottingen Septuagint, the phrase in question glaring in its absence. Who am I to question such specialists?
13 om. τῆς νυκτός 62′ | μετά = Marc. 14:62 Apoc. 1:7] επι Q Sa Hippol.Ant.HS Eus.ecl. Chr. (= I828) PsChr. II799 Tht. IV524 = οʹ et Matth. 24:30 26:64 | ὡς Cyr.VIII648] ωσει 62′ 449 C′−87 26 46′ 106 407 590 Cyr. III1048 | ἐρχόμενος B-26-46′-239 Q V 538 LaS Hippol. Eus.dem. p. 440, 10 et ecl. CyrHieros. p. 909 Didym. p. 893 PsAth.IV697 Chr.I828 VII553 PsChr. II799 Cyr. I313 IX933 X309 Hil. Aug.ep. 198, 3] + ην A′’ L’-311 C′ 230′’ 407 534 590 Arab Eus.dem. p. 495, 23 et eccl. theol. et c. Marc. Chr. (= I294) Tht. Cyr. VI284 VIII 648. 1048 Aug. civ. 18, 34 = 𝔐; + αυτος ην 62′; ηρχετο Tht. IV524 = οʹ; venit verss.p Lucif.; veniebat Vig. c. Eut. 1, 14 PsVig. c. Var. 1, 47 | om. καὶ προσήχθη αὐτῷ Aeth Eus.dem. p. 440, 10 CyrHieros. p. 909 Tht.IV524 PsVig.; om. καί A’ | προσήχθη αὐτῷ B-46′ Q* LaS Hippol.Ant.p Didym. Lucif. Hil. PsVig. trin. 3] προσηνεχθη αυτω Qc Hippol. p. 210, 18 et Ant.p Eus.dem. p. 495, 24 et ecl. et eccles. theol. PsAth. IV697 = Sixt.: cf. Is. 53:7 σʹ; αυτω προσηνεχθη 230; ενωπιον (εμπροσθεν Eus.) αυτου προσηνεχθη (+ αυτω 62′ 311-lII Chr. Tht.p) O L′’ C′ 106 233′ 393 407 534 590 Co Arab Arm Eus. c. Marc. Chr. (= I 294. 828) Tht. Cyr. I 313 VI 284 VIII 648. 1048 IX 933 X 309 Aug. civ. 18, 34; ενωπιον αυτου (+ και 584) προσηγαγον αυτον A’ 26 = 𝔐; pr. ενωπιον αυτου 239
14 αὐτῷ ἐδόθη] tr. verss.p Hippol.Ant.p Eus.dem. p. 495 et ecl. Cyr. I 313 Lucif. Hil. = οʹ | ἀρχή … τιμή] tr. 311 CyrHieros. p. 909 Tht.p; αρχη … εξουσια Sa; εξουσια … τιμη Eus.ecl.: cf. οʹ | γλῶσσαι] pr. και B 538 106 verss.p Hippol.p Hil. PsVig. trin. 3 = 𝔐: cf. 3:4 | δουλεύσουσιν αὐτῷ Q-233 46′ 590 Co Aeth Arab Hippol. Eus.ecl. Didym. p. 893 PsAsAth. IV 697 Hil. PsVig. trin. 3] δουλευουσιν αυτω B-239 LaS CyrHieros. p. 909 Lucif.; αυτω δουλευουσιν A’ 538-88 c Eus.dem. Chr. I 294; αυτω δουλευσουσιν (-σωσιν 62′ 230) O L-311-449 C 26 106 230’ 393 (+ και υπακουσονται: ex 27) 407 534 Arm Eus. eccl. theol. et c. Marc. Chr. (= I 828) Cyr. VI 284 VII 656 VIII 648. 1048 IX 933 X 309 Tht. Aug. civ. 18, 34 = 𝔐: cf. 27 | ἡ ἐξουσία] αυτω ουσια 534; pr. και L’-311 LaS Aeth Arab Arm Tht. Ir.lat Lucif. Hil. = οʹ | ἐξουσία1°◠2° 88 | om. καὶ ἡ βας. αὐτοῦ οὐ διαφθ. 230: homoiot.; om. καί LaS | οὐ ult.] pr. η V Aeth = 𝔐
Joseph Ziegler, Olivier Munnich, and Detlef Fraenkel, eds., Susanna, Daniel, Bel et Draco, vol. XVI, 2, Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis Editum (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1999), 339–341.
In the Foreword to Daniel Pietersma explains: "It is not until 7-12 that one generally finds the common vocabulary in the two Greek versions to run around 50% and portions (e.g., 7.10, 25; 8.11-17, 21-23; 9.3-4, 11-12, 19-20, 27; 10.3-6, 19-20; 11.38) where there is extensive argreement for a verse or more. Some of the places where there is agreement can be demonstrated to be due to textual corruption, while others are incidental agreements that would be expected from two independent translators working from a similar source text. However, the portions of the Greek versions in these chapters where the verbal agreements between the texts are strong give the appearance that the TH text is a revision of the OG."
-
56
Old Greek Daniel's Son of Man
by peacefulpete inagain this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site.
the basic question i want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in daniel 7. as we all know christians understood the figure to be the messiah (christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of israel as jews typically read it?
or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?.
-
-
Vidqun
Peacefulpete, in the end much ado about nothing. NETS used the Gottingen Septuagint as basis. Those editors as well as Pietersma and team view it as a transcriptional error [καὶ ὡς παλαιὸς (Dan. 7:13 LXT) > καὶ ἕως τοῦ παλαιου (Dan. 7:13 LXXRH)], therefore the similarity between the Old Greek and Theodotion in their translation. I thought it was a long shot and it is a long shot, but interesting nevertheless.
-
56
Old Greek Daniel's Son of Man
by peacefulpete inagain this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site.
the basic question i want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in daniel 7. as we all know christians understood the figure to be the messiah (christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of israel as jews typically read it?
or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?.
-
-
Vidqun
Not sure how one can view "someone like the son of man" the same as the Ancient of days. He approached the Ancient of days and kingship was bestowed upon him.
Daniel 7:13, 14 (OG) I was watching in the night visions, and lo, as it were a son of man was coming upon the clouds of heaven. And he came as far as the ancient of days, and the attendants were present with him. And royal authority was given to him, and all the nations of the earth according to posterity, and all honor was serving him. And his authority is an everlasting authority, which shall never be removed-- and his kingship, which will never perish.
--- Daniel (TH) I was watching in the night visions, and lo, as it were a son of man coming with the clouds of heaven. And he came as far as the ancient of days and was presented to him. And to him was given the dominion and the honor and the kingship, and all peoples, tribes, languages shall be subject him. His authority is an everlasting authority, which will not pass away, and his kingship will not be destroyed.
(Dan. 7:13, 14 NETS)
Theodotion based his text on the MT. It became the standard Daniel text. Most modern scholars believe the OG version to be based on a different, unidentified text because of the differences. Few MSS remain with it as their text.
However, it seems as though "son of man" was a common designation at the time. Gabriel refers to Daniel as such (cf. Dan. 8:17). Of course the context is different. Same goes for Ezekiel. In the vision the person coming before the Ancient of days is referred to "someone like a son of man," quite apt for a heavenly setting, where a human would not survive. Makes sense to me.
-
56
Old Greek Daniel's Son of Man
by peacefulpete inagain this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site.
the basic question i want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in daniel 7. as we all know christians understood the figure to be the messiah (christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of israel as jews typically read it?
or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?.
-
-
Vidqun
Jesus referred to himself as "Son of man" approximately 60 times. Difficult not to make the connection.
-
7
renewed active cooperation of the WTG as an NGO at the UN
by Pedro inthere is news about the wtg's cooperation with the un as an ngo.. according to the un, every ngo is obliged by statute to actively work towards the goals of the un.. the historical case on the same topic, from 1992-2001, should be known.. at that time, the cooperation was exposed by a report in the british daily newspaper “the guardian” on october 8, 2001.. the wtg canceled its membership a day later under the pressure of outrage from some congregations.. many witnesses couldn't believe it and wrote to the un asking for information as to whether it was true.. the un response letter is still available on the un homepage.. here is the link to the un statement.
https://www.un.org/en/civil-society/watchtowerletter.
now it is time again!.
-
-
Vidqun
This is an Indian NGO and not connected to the UN. If the connection to the UN can be proved, I will believe. This is probably an NGO connected to the Indian Government.
-
66
My decision.
by MissDaSilva ini’ve decided to disassociate from the jw organisation.
i cannot be part of a community that blatantly rejects the sacrifice of jesus in that demonic memorial ritual.
amazing what information you find when you start researching.. i’m writing my letter and posting it to the kingdom hall this morning.
-
-
Vidqun
Good decision. If some wants to know, Where will you go? Answer: I remain a follower of Christ and a worshipper of Jehovah. Nothing has changed.
John 6 is a good incentive to disassociate. It has some serious implications: "Accordingly Jesus said to them, Most truly I say to YOU, Unless YOU eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, YOU have no life in yourselves." (John 6:53 NWT) No room for spectators in this warning!
Another scripture I found helpful, is Rev. 7:1. When will the sealing of the 144,000 take place? This is clearly a future occurrence. The transition between chapters 6 & 7 of Revelation is introduced by the Greek phrase Καὶ μετὰτοῦτο (Rev. 7:1 Tischendorf’s New Testament, 8th edition; cf. NA28 footnote), “and after this,” “this” referring to the breaking of the sixth seal, specifically the kings of the earth and their followers, finding refuge in their underground shelters. This must still take place. So you are presumpteous to say the least if you view yourself as one of the 144,000.
Everything of the best with your new life.
-
62
Revelation 13 and 17 Beasts
by Duran inrevelation 17:8-11,12-14. revelation 13:3,5,7,8,10;11:2,3. revelation 13:11-17;19:19,20,21. revelation 15:2;20:4. what beast does it state that gets thrown into the fiery lake with the false prophet?
what beast gets the 42-month authority given to it in which time the motb is given out?.
what beast is the 8th king?.
-
-
Vidqun
No, obviously we're not on the same page. Please identify God's people from the thousands if not millions of churches? At this stage none of them qualify. The Philadelphia congregation represents all people on earth in the 21st century? Nope. I don't see it like that. It's a stretch.
Armageddon in Pidgin English is "the big buggerup." That's how I see Christendom at the moment. So unity must be established before the GT. I'm not going to go over it again. That would be boring. Clue: It has to do with the fulfillment on Joel and Acts. Soon!
Joel 3:1, 2: Who are the priests and who are the minsters? Please identify them so that I can join. There's thousand if not millions of denominations to choose from. At this stage I don't want to go there.
You've got this right. peirasmos/2346. thlibó = affliction/distress/calamity/suffering. It has quite a wide meaning. Notice test = suffering. Remember, Jesus was tested in the wilderness by Satan.
θλῖψις. Greek for “tribulation.” In our literature (as in LXX) frequently and in the metaphysical sense trouble that inflicts distress, oppression, affliction, tribulation. Of distress that is brought about by outward circumstances.
πειρασμός (= “test”) means “an attempt to learn the nature or character of something,” test, trial (Sir 6:7; 27:5, 7) πρὸς πειρασμόν to test you 1 Pt 4:12. διὰπειρασμόν τινα because you are being tried in some way Hm 9:7. Perh. Js 1:2 and 1 Pt 1:6 belong here (cp. Pind., O. 4, 22 διά πειράτοι βροτῶνἔλεγχο=trial is the test of mortals; sim. N. 3, 70f). Some translate passive Greek verb πειρασμός with “being tempted,” i.e., an attempt to make one do something wrong, temptation, enticement to sin. If this is the case, Jesus’ admonition to the Philadelphians might not refer to the Great Tribulation after all (cf. 2 Thes. 2:2, 3).
All the nations won't fit on the low plain of Jehoshaphat (= Jehovah is judge). Same goes for the Mountain of Megiddo. These I view as a world situation rather than a geographical location.