Posts by scholar

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

I disagree with your claim that Daniel 4 and 5 both simply refer to an immediate fulfillment of prophecy with an immediate fate for the then ruler for Daniel 4 discloses much more than what was foretold in ch. 5. In fact, ch.4 has more in common with ch2 as many early commentators who believed in the Gentille Times used ch2 as the foundation of the doctrine rather than ch.4. The major difference between ch.4 and 5.is that there is no mention or significant allusion to God's Kingdom except where Daniel refers to the previous history of Nebuchadnezzer's chastisement described in ch4. Refer to ch.5:18-21.

Further, what these accounts have in common is the fact that both rulers were forced to recognize the Kingdom of God as ruling and superior to their sovereignty andboth men were forced to recognize this fact by divine intervention.

Daniel 4 requires interpretation just as Daniel had to interpret the dream in the first place and such required interpretation proves that something beyond the obvious is intended for example the Kingdom is mentioned not just in this chapter but pervades the entire book yet that Kingdom is regarded by scholars as eschatological but it still today requires interpretation. I am not surprised by the fact that commentators do not interpret the tree dream as JW's and the Early Bible Students have done because they have graet difficulty with the concept of God's Kingdom. I have at my disposal all of the major technical commentaries on Daniel and I have found interesting bits and pieces that serve illuninate our interpretation and I am happy with that. One commentary that stands out from all others is the Heremeneia commentary by John Collins who is a prominent scholar on Daniel and I find his observations on the background of the dream most informative.

Again I take issue with you as to the fact of Daniel 4 has as its theme the eschatological kingdom of God which demotes both a present and future reality for the very fact that those Kingdom verses refer to God ruling from 'time indefinite and is kingdom is for generation after generation' proves the matter. Daniel 4:3.17.25,32.34. Further, I draw your attention to the comments by Bruce K Waltke in his An Old Testament Theology, 2007, Zondervan, pp.158-159 whereupon he refers to verses form ch 4. highlighting the eschatological kingdom of God.

If in fact, Dan.4 is about rulership, the right to rule and God's authority over the nations as themes of this chapter and that this chapter is followed up by a description of worls powers by means of a vision and if the chapter 4 discloses the an interpreted Gentile Times-Luke 21;24 then clearly it is about World Powers and their relationship with God's Kingdom.

I agree that the pesher is not found directly into the text and must be read into it and this is where interpretation becomes necessary on the other hand just reading the text directly and seeing just as a literal account of Neb's experience robs the text of any meaning and becomes nonsense because it ignores those themes that the text does deal with.

I cannot comment on Ginsburg because I do not have his reference to hand so if it is important then perhaps could you paste his comment in your reply.

I do not share your opinion that the 'trampling' in Dan.7 better equates with the 'trampling' of Luke 21;24 at the expense of Dan.4 but as I have to rush off to work rather unexpectedly I will take up your final comments in my next post.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

bennyk

Post 430

What scholar was referring to was that in that Manifesto those clergyman correctly deduced that the Gentile Times had ended and that they recognized the theological fact of the Gentile Times, that is all. The promulgation of false prophecies by us is a fanciful exaggeration of apostates who have no interest in prophecy at all and in fact have no mission or Gospel. When you have a prophecy or when you begin to prophecy then you can start talking about what others have done.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

Mary

Post 10681

The expression patoumene 'being trampled is a passive participle which has verbal aspect of the past which is demonstrated by the fact that Jerusalem had long since been dominated by Gentile rulers since 607 BCE when the Judean Momarchy was overthrown. So, Jesus words and prophecy simply reflected facts of history. The very fact that something is 'being trampled' demotes an action that began in the past so the meaning is implicit in the literal sense of the Greek word and its English translation.

Luke makes no mention of Nebuchadnezzer or his tree dream in his Olivet Discourse but his theme was the future coming of the Kingdom which is exactly what Daniel in chapter 4 and the rest of the book thematizes. So, everything is in the pot.

There is indeed everything needed to synchronize Daniel 4 with Luke 21:24 and to be more particular you have the commonality of 'times', the 'trampling down' of the typical Kingdom of God, Jerusalem. It is all there theologically.

Scholar will continue to devastate apostate criticism of that sound, well proven date of 607 BCE as he has done for so many years so you keep on and scholar will keep on keeping on and luving it. You have a nice sleep and pleasant dreams.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

Leolaia

Post 13125

The apostates now bring out the Big Gun! Leolaia now speaks with great authority!

Why should the Society extend any future warning to Belshazzar when in Daniel 5 all that it it discloses is an immediate fate to the city of Babylon and its ruling dynasty? The book of Daniel contains narratives not only of the future but of the immediate present as in the case of Daniel 4 with its present/future account and Daniel 5 with its story set in the present. Daniel 4 is clearly eschatological because it carries the theme of God's Kingdom which is clearly eschatol.ogical by its own defintion.

I agree with you that in some narrow sense Daniel 4 presages the events of Daniel but I would arguue that Daniel 4 along with the dream image of Daniel 2 are predictive of the rest of Daniel with its description of World Powers right up to the Time of the End.

The account of Daniel is allegorized by the vocabulary of the story with the use of 'seven times' and not years and by the permeating theme of the eschatological Kingdom of God and so it is that the 'pesher' of the Gentile Times is very much consistent with both the literal and figurative meaning of the story. The abasement of Nebuchadnezzer prefigured the fact that Gentile hegemony would exist iover the earth for a period of seven times and after the expiration of those times as Nebuchadnezzer was restored to rulership so it was that God's Kingdom was now rightfuuly restored to rulership in 1914 CE thus ending Gentile domination or the Gentile Times. Such an interpretation is both internally consistent with the narrative, ancient/modern history and prophecy.

Whatever scholars say about chronos the fact is that kairos and is a suitable equivalent term for iddanim and so we must exegete with what the text actually says rather than a supposed reading as interesting as it may be.

To say that the kairos of Luke 21:24 can not be allusive of Daniel 4 but rather of Daniel 7 does not make much sense because the simple fact is that the Lucan passage refers to a kairoi ethnon, a period of time of trampling by Gentile nations on Jerusalem which was that original earthly Kingdom of God. That trampling is similar to that cutting down of the tree being banded for 'seven times. Clearly the events and imagery bare much in common.

Daniel 7 and 9 along with 4 reveal a common theme and that is God's Kingdom which very much is thematic with the entire Olivet Discourse especially the above lucan passage which describes the duration and timing for that kingdom to break forth. Your linguistic considerations regarding the primacy of Daniel 7 and 9 at the exclusion of Daniel 4 with Luke 21:24 fail to convince me.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

allelsefails

Post 72

The Messianic Kingdom is an adjunct to God's Kingdom.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

allelsefails

Post 71

I thought I answered your question so let us try again and scholar will help you for scholar loves to help people. You are mistaken because the seventy years was always counted not from the Fall of Babylon but from the Return of the Jews under Cyrus in 536 BCE which began in 606 BCE with the destruction of Jerusalem. This is explained in The Time is at Hand, p.51 by Charles Russell. At that time those earnest Bible Students found confirmation for their Bible Chronology in the Pyramids of Egypt which was quite fashionable amongst scholars of the day.

However, celebrated WT scholars with the aid of increased scholarship saw the need for some 'fine tuning' and so providentially adjustments were made to our chronology such as the zero year, Date of Babylon's Fal amongst other technical matters resulting in an advanced and superior Bible chronology in 1966 vindicating amongst other things 607 BCE and 1914 CE.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

Mary

Post 10679

There is sufficient exegetical points that link the Gentile Times of Luke 21:24 with Daniel 4. Firstly, there is the vocabulary with the use of kairos Gk with iddanim Aram. Secondly, there is the tense of the verb estai patoumene which literally means ' will be being trampled' which demotes a progressive past action into the future. Thirdly, the use of Jerusalem which has always had a theological significance amd in the particular relates to God's Kingdom which again is thematic of Daniel 4 and the entire book. Fourthly, the Olivet Discourse of Luke 21 deals with events gthat involve the destruction of wordly nations and worldly rulers which again is thematic of Daniel 4 and the book of Daniel. Fifth, Jesus quoted often from Daniel as seen in the Olivet Discourse of Mark 13, Luke 21 and Matt. 24-25.

I could go on further but five reasons will do for the moment.

Daniel 4 is not just about Neb and his spanking but there were other parties involved such as God Himself, the future Heir of the Kingdom, the Watchers and Daniel himself so the story is bigger than Neb for it is like that big cosmic tree. Further you have that overriding theme of the Kingdom which is what Neb was forced to recognize.

For a person who is a stupid as you claim scholar certainly has you in his grips and commands your instant attention. If scholar is such a fool as you claim then just ignore him and he will go away but you can't because scholar is a potent danger to apostates and their deceitful lying propaganda.

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

Hobo Ken

Post 174

You state that certain dates such as 1918 and 1935 are without scriptural validity in a manner of speaking but what you fail to realize that such dates are part of various prophecies that describe the True Church living in the Last Days. The Church would be refined and experience the intervention of the Head of the Church during this momentous period.and such interventiion is part and parcel of NT Theology.

It is incorrect to say that 1914 is not part of Bible Doctrine for indeed is part of Eschatology and its calculation is firmly based on Scripture with its chronology, prohecy and history so the Bible contains all of the necessary data for its determination. It is only correct to say that the 1914 as a number is not found in the Bible.

We have nothing to be embarrassed about and the Lord looks after His people and Organization and we have nothing to fear from the future but What about you?

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

Mary

Post 10678

Yes there is because the One who would be given that Kingdom was the future Messiah, Jesus Christ as prophesied in Daniel 4:17 which the latter part reads:"and that to the one whom he wants to, he gives it and he sets up over it even the lowliest one of mankind". This prophecy in the context of Neb's dream is further proof amongst many others that prove the antypical fulfillment of Neb's experience. Enjoy!

scholar JW

421

70 years = 607?

by allelsefails in

70 years of captivity?.

i myself have always believed that when archaeology disagreed with the bible the bible must be right.

that is how i dismissed the idea that jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587 bce.

scholar

isaac austin

Post 1487

You need to brush up on your comprehension skills for past and present experience has demonstrated to schola rthat apostates have poor comprehension skills. Firstly, the account in Ezra 3:8 nowhere indicates in what year of Cyrus the temple foundation was laid for the text only states that" And in the second year of their coming to the house of the true God at Jerusalem, in the second month... Secondly, just because Josephus states that the temple foundation was laid in the "second year of Cyrus" does not necessarily equate for the purpose of chronology for Josephus does not mention in what month this occurred.

Celebrated WT scholars in dealing with the chronology of this period have determined from the Bible record that the Temple foundation was laid in the second month in the year after the Jews returned which would be 536 BCE. The attempted synchronization of Ezra 3:8 with Josephus remains a dilemna for scholars and scholar himself has an interest in this matter. Interestingly, a chart entitled Chronology -Ezra-Nehemiah on page 667, in The NIV STUDY BIBLE, 1995, Zondervan agrees with us that the Jews built the altar in the 7th month 537 BCE and began work on the Temple in the 2nd month 536 BCE.

Alan F long ago tried to synchronize Ezra 3:8 with Josephus but scholar trounced him on it so at face value there may be some merit in the argument but the detail puts the argument aside for further research by competent scholars and scholar himself no doubt will sove the problem. One cannot base an argument on assumption as Alan F tried to do and so are you, an argument such as this must be based on what the text actually states and not the reading into the text something of an apostate agenda.

scholar JW