Who are the NT epistles aimed at?

[Spud]

So you don't know which of two (or possibly three) decrees to start from

Cyrus' decree authorized the return of the exiles and the rebuilding of the temple, but Daniel 9:25 concerns the rebuilding of the city. It isn't until Artaxerxes that we see them rebuilding the city.
If we take Artaxerxes' letter to Ezra (Ezra 7) in 457 BC as the starting point, the 490 years end around the time of the stoning of Stephen.
This is where I found the above information:
http://dedication.www3.50megs.com/457.html
Heads up: Ezra is quite confusing chronologically. The opposition that occurred during Artaxerxes' reign is detailed in Ezra 4. In verse 12 we read, "The king should know that the Jews who came up to us from you have gone to Jerusalem and are rebuilding that rebellious and wicked city". This is the first mention of rebuilding the city.

[jeremyp]

Cyrus' decree authorized the return of the exiles and the rebuilding of the temple, but Daniel 9:25 concerns the rebuilding of the city. It isn't until Artaxerxes that we see them rebuilding the city.
If we take Artaxerxes' letter to Ezra (Ezra 7) in 457 BC as the starting point, the 490 years end around the time of the stoning of Stephen.
This is where I found the above information:
http://dedication.www3.50megs.com/457.html
Heads up: Ezra is quite confusing chronologically. The opposition that occurred during Artaxerxes' reign is detailed in Ezra 4. In verse 12 we read, "The king should know that the Jews who came up to us from you have gone to Jerusalem and are rebuilding that rebellious and wicked city". This is the first mention of rebuilding the city.

I thought you were supposed to start from the rebuilding of the Temple (520 - 516BCE)? It looks to me like you are taking the presumed date of Jesus' execution (which is not really known btw), counting back and looking for some significant event to pretend is the start of the prophecy period.

[2Corrie]

I thought you were supposed to start from the rebuilding of the Temple (520 - 516BCE)? It looks to me like you are taking the presumed date of Jesus' execution (which is not really known btw), counting back and looking for some significant event to pretend is the start of the prophecy period.

"There are many ways this is calculated....Either way it's calculated, only Yeshua could be Mashiach -- no one else fits into Daniel's timeframe"

http://www.lightofmashiach.org/daniel9_26.html

Then you have to explain away His death and the destruction of the temple.

[Hope]

It looks to me like you are taking the presumed date of Jesus' execution (which is not really known btw), ...

about as 'really known' as your suggested range of dates for the destruction of the Temple in the 6th century BC

[Spud]

"There are many ways this is calculated....Either way it's calculated, only Yeshua could be Mashiach -- no one else fits into Daniel's timeframe"

http://www.lightofmashiach.org/daniel9_26.html

Then you have to explain away His death and the destruction of the temple.

Peake's Bible Commentary says Daniel 9:24-27 refers to Antiochus Epiphanes. 1 and 2 Maccabees seem to confirm this, although the time frame doesn't fit with 490 years at all. Another possible solution is to take the decree in Nehemiah 2 by Artaxerxes in 445 BC as the start of the 70 weeks, and use 360-day (lunar) years. Apparently 69 'weeks' then takes us to AD 30:
http://www.gotquestions.org/seventy-sevens.html

[Gordon]

about as 'really known' as your suggested range of dates for the destruction of the Temple in the 6th century BC

So what?

If the details aren't known then there is uncertainty, so that any claims to knowledge are at best estimates and at worst guessing.

[Gordon]

Peake's Bible Commentary says Daniel 9:24-27 refers to Antiochus Epiphanes. 1 and 2 Maccabees seem to confirm this, although the time frame doesn't fit with 490 years at all. Another possible solution is to take the decree in Nehemiah 2 by Artaxerxes in 445 BC as the start of the 70 weeks, and use 360-day (lunar) years. Apparently 69 'weeks' then takes us to AD 30:
http://www.gotquestions.org/seventy-sevens.html

In other words there is no certain knowledge, and there are even contradictory claims about this. You guys seems to be thrashing about in the assumption that this 'prophecy' must mean 'something, when perhaps it means nothing, so various 'somethings' are being contrived - hence your posts on this are full of 'ifs, 'possibles' etc.

Then there is the problem of 'prophecy' being yet another of these unfalsifiable religious claims - a sensible person would treat these tales of 'prophecy' as being one of those cultural superstitions that just shouldn't be taken seriously any more. 

[jeremyp]

"There are many ways this is calculated

which makes the idea that this is a prophecy of Jesus a total mockery - you just pick the one of many ways that fits the answer you want to be true.

Then you have to explain away His death and the destruction of the temple.

We all die.

The Temple was destroyed by the Romans because the Jews got a bit uppity.

[jeremyp]

about as 'really known' as your suggested range of dates for the destruction of the Temple in the 6th century BC

Which makes it even easier to fit the prophecy to the date range.

Your point?

[jeremyp]

Peake's Bible Commentary says Daniel 9:24-27 refers to Antiochus Epiphanes. 1 and 2 Maccabees seem to confirm this, although the time frame doesn't fit with 490 years at all.

The 490 years is something that Christians have arrived at by working backwards from the answer they want.

[Spud]

The 490 years is something that Christians have arrived at by working backwards from the answer they want.

There is the temptation to do that, but if one is simply checking whether or not it fits I can't see anything wrong with it. However, Keil & Delitzsch say that the 70 x 7 should not be taken to represent years:

But since these periods of seven years, as Hengstenberg himself confesses, are not called in the law שׁבעים or שׁבעות [weeks], therefore, from the repeated designation of the seventh year as that of the great Sabbath merely (Leviticus 25:2, Leviticus 25:4-5; Leviticus 26:34-35, Leviticus 26:43; 2 Chronicles 36:21), the idea of year-weeks in no way follows. The law makes mention not only of the Sabbath-year, but also of periods of seven times seven years, after the expiry of which a year of jubilee was always to be celebrated (Leviticus 25:8.). These, as well as the Sabbath-years, might be called שׁבעים. Thus the idea of year-weeks has no exegetical foundation. Hofmann and Kliefoth are in the right when they remark that שׁבעים does not necessarily mean year-weeks, but an intentionally indefinite designation of a period of time measured by the number seven, whose chronological duration must be determined on other grounds.

http://biblehub.com/commentaries/kad/daniel/9.htm
(red insertion mine)

[ippy]

There is the temptation to do that, but if one is simply checking whether or not it fits I can't see anything wrong with it. However, Keil & Delitzsch say that the 70 x 7 should not be taken to represent years:

But since these periods of seven years, as Hengstenberg himself confesses, are not called in the law שׁבעים or שׁבעות [weeks], therefore, from the repeated designation of the seventh year as that of the great Sabbath merely (Leviticus 25:2, Leviticus 25:4-5; Leviticus 26:34-35, Leviticus 26:43; 2 Chronicles 36:21), the idea of year-weeks in no way follows. The law makes mention not only of the Sabbath-year, but also of periods of seven times seven years, after the expiry of which a year of jubilee was always to be celebrated (Leviticus 25:8.). These, as well as the Sabbath-years, might be called שׁבעים. Thus the idea of year-weeks has no exegetical foundation. Hofmann and Kliefoth are in the right when they remark that שׁבעים does not necessarily mean year-weeks, but an intentionally indefinite designation of a period of time measured by the number seven, whose chronological duration must be determined on other grounds.

http://biblehub.com/commentaries/kad/daniel/9.htm
(red insertion mine)

Oh boy, oh wow, yippi!

ippy

[jeremyp]

There is the temptation to do that, but if one is simply checking whether or not it fits I can't see anything wrong with it. However, Keil & Delitzsch say that the 70 x 7 should not be taken to represent years:

More evidence that Christians start with the answer they want and work backwards. There's nothing credible to suggest that anything in Daniel refers to Jesus, so you just make something up.

[Spud]

More evidence that Christians start with the answer they want and work backwards. There's nothing credible to suggest that anything in Daniel refers to Jesus, so you just make something up.

If there is a claim that it refers to Jesus, what is wrong with checking it out?
And  even if it is found not to refer to him, there is still the claim that it is predictive and not retrospective prophecy. Chapter 8 predicts Alexander the Great, the Seleucids and the Ptolemies in detail, yet claims to have been written at the time of the Persian empire. This is verified by references to Daniel in Ezekiel (14:14,20; 28:3), 1 Maccabees 2:59,60, and Josephus (Antiquities XI, VIII, 3-5). Yippy!

[ippy]

If there is a claim that it refers to Jesus, what is wrong with checking it out?
And  even if it is found not to refer to him, there is still the claim that it is predictive and not retrospective prophecy. Chapter 8 predicts Alexander the Great, the Seleucids and the Ptolemies in detail, yet claims to have been written at the time of the Persian empire. This is verified by references to Daniel in Ezekiel (14:14,20; 28:3), 1 Maccabees 2:59,60, and Josephus (Antiquities XI, VIII, 3-5). Yippy!

In what way does it matter?

It might be made to matter if you and people like you could establish that this Jesus bloke was in fact found to be the person you would like to think he was?

Arn't discussions like this one similar to putting the cart before the horse and a bit pointless?

ippy

[Gordon]

Chapter 8 predicts Alexander the Great, the Seleucids and the Ptolemies in detail, yet claims to have been written at the time of the Persian empire. This is verified by references to Daniel in Ezekiel (14:14,20; 28:3), 1 Maccabees 2:59,60, and Josephus (Antiquities XI, VIII, 3-5). Yippy!

Just how precise is this 'detail' in Daniel 8 - is it clear and unequivocal?

[Spud]

Just how precise is this 'detail' in Daniel 8 - is it clear and unequivocal?

As in, does it tell us what colour Antiochus' underpants were? Nah.

[Gordon]

As in, does it tell us what colour Antiochus' underpants were? Nah.

In other words not very precise at all!

[Spud]

There is however a figure given for the number of days during which the daily sacrifice would be taken away (1,150); according to 1 Maccabees 1:54 and 4:52 the time was roughly 3 years (15 Kislev 168 BC - 25 Kislev 165 BC))

Edit, this may be wrong... It is literally 2,300 evenings mornings, which should probably be interpreted as 2,300 days.

[Gordon]

There is however a figure given for the number of days during which the daily sacrifice would be taken away (1,150); according to 1 Maccabees 1:54 and 4:52 the time was roughly 3 years (15 Kislev 168 BC - 25 Kislev 165 BC))

Terms like 'according to' and 'roughly' don't inspire confidence precision-wise, I'd say.

[Ricky Spanish]

Following on from Rose's post# 113 on the '1H - what type of board do we want' thread:
Interestingly, a lot of what is in the New Testament epistles is aimed at the church and those within it.  I would agree that the church has sometimes tried to impose those ideas on those outside of the church (though when a society has an official religion or denomination - as has been the case in Europe over the centuries - it can sometimes be difficult to practically know who is outside of the church).  I often think that some here think that they are aimed at global humanity.  In a way they are, but only as humanity individually becomes part of the church.

When Paul does refer to "the church of God" it was obviously not the "Church" as we know it today. In his epistles, it is only a small "church".

Have we established who you 'think' "the NT epistles" are "aimed at" yet?

[Spud]

Terms like 'according to' and 'roughly' don't inspire confidence precision-wise, I'd say.

If you need precision, have a Google of a quote from Herodotus which shows that the early Greeks used to add an intercalery month every other year. A year was 360 days. This gives 390 + 360 + 390 + 10 = 1,150 days.
However, this is not necessarily the correct way to interpret the 2,300 evening-mornings.  An alternative explanation is that this is the time period between when Menalaus stole treasure from the temple (2 Maccabees 4) until the restoration of the daily burnt offering.

Incidentally, the rest of the prophecy is precise, regarding the Medo-Persian and Greek empires.

[Dicky Underpants]

When Paul does refer to "the church of God" it was obviously not the "Church" as we know it today. In his epistles, it is only a small "church".

Have we established who you 'think' "the NT epistles" are "aimed at" yet?

Oh quite obviously the whole corpus of Christians throughout space and time, until the L.J. What else could one possibly infer from such a text as the following:

then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord.

1Thessalonians 4:17

[jeremyp]

Chapter 8 predicts Alexander the Great, the Seleucids and the Ptolemies in detail, yet claims to have been written at the time of the Persian empire.

The predictions are pretty accurate. Clearly the claim that the book predates the predictions must be false.

This is verified by references to Daniel in Ezekiel (14:14,20; 28:3),

Those two passages reference a character named Daniel, they provide no evidence that he ever wrote a book or even that this is the correct Daniel

1 Maccabees 2:59,60, and Josephus (Antiquities XI, VIII, 3-5). Yippy!

Both of which were written many years after Daniel. Daniel was written around 164BCE, 1 Maccabees around 100BCE and Josephus was writing in the late 1st century CE.

There is also a book called "Wisdom of Jesus Son of Sirach" written about 200BCE that lists the Great Prophets and guess what: Daniel is not in the list. His book was unknown in 200BCE.

[Hope]

Those two passages reference a character named Daniel, they provide no evidence that he ever wrote a book or even that this is the correct Daniel

The Jews had a pretty good grasp of their national history, and believed/believe that he was.