Daniel 9: 20-27

[miamited]

This is a discussion that was encouraged by another poster to be handled as its own thread on the public forums of CF. I would ask that for any who offer input on this thread, that any such input be directly related to the verses of Daniel chapter 9:20-27. The purpose of this discussion is to determine first, whether this passage of the Scriptures was written in the time that the Scriptures claim that it was, and second, what bearing that 'time and place' of the writing has upon the message that it offers to Daniel, and to us.

I'm going to open with a word of prayer and anyone who is not ok with that is free to skip over the following paragraph:

Father, I ask that your wisdom and understanding be made known to all who participate in this discussion. I trust in your word that it is your will that everyone come to salvation through the proclamation of the gospel and it is in upholding your will in that, that I offer these words. I ask that you provide me, through your Spirit, the words that might make a difference in the hearts of those who have yet to find you. That this will be an opening for some to seek to diligently find you. In Jesus name I ask these things. Amen.

 

[HTacianas]

This is a discussion that was encouraged by another poster to be handled as its own thread on the public forums of CF. I would ask that for any who offer input on this thread, that any such input be directly related to the verses of Daniel chapter 9:20-27. The purpose of this discussion is to determine first, whether this passage of the Scriptures was written in the time that the Scriptures claim that it was, and second, what bearing that 'time and place' of the writing has upon the message that it offers to Daniel, and to us.

I'm going to open with a word of prayer and anyone who is not ok with that is free to skip over the following paragraph:

Father, I ask that your wisdom and understanding be made known to all who participate in this discussion. I trust in your word that it is your will that everyone come to salvation through the proclamation of the gospel and it is in upholding your will in that, that I offer these words. I ask that you provide me, through your Spirit, the words that might make a difference in the hearts of those who have yet to find you. That this will be an opening for some to seek to diligently find you. In Jesus name I ask these things. Amen.

No, it was not written in the time some people claim. It was written during the time of the Macabbees to help spur on the Jews. But the writer inadvertently predicted the final destruction of the Jewish temple.

 

[miamited]

Greetings to all who gather here,

Let me say that when I respond to people on this forum, unless their real name is used, I tend to abbreviate many screen names. Often they are difficult spellings or a conjunction of several words and so I do tend to abbreviate them. I hope that causes no offense. My name, yes my actual name is ted and anyone is free to address me as such...or not. Miamited is also fine, if some are more comfortable with the screen names or just MT.

This thread asks whether or not we can trust that Daniel was written at the time it is supposed to have been written according to the Scriptures and I think that's probably the best place to start. The Scriptures tell us that this writing is about, and likely written by, a man by the name of Daniel, who lived in the days in which there was a King Nebuchadnezzar ruling over the great city of Babylon. As a believer, I trust what the Scriptures tell me about the time and place.

Are there disagreements that these writings were written approximately 600-530 B.C.? Here's what wiki says about the man Daniel and his life: Daniel was a righteous man of princely lineage and lived about 620–538 B.C. He was carried off to Babylon in 605 B.C. by Nebuchadnezzar, the Assyrian, but was still living when Assyria was overthrown by the Medes and Persians.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[miamited]

No, it was not written in the time some people claim. It was written during the time of the Macabbees to help spur on the Jews. But the writer inadvertently predicted the final destruction of the Jewish temple.

Hi HT,

On what evidences do you make your claim? The Maccabean period was from about 167-160 B.C. Correct?

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[HTacianas]

Hi HT,

On what evidences do you make your claim? The Maccabean period was from about 167-160 B.C. Correct?

God bless,
In Christ, ted

This explains it fairly well:

Book of Daniel - Wikipedia

 

[miamited]

No, it was not written in the time some people claim. It was written during the time of the Macabbees to help spur on the Jews. But the writer inadvertently predicted the final destruction of the Jewish temple.

Hi HT,

Also, according to the prophecy given to Daniel, your writer not only 'inadvertently' predicted the final destruction of the Jewish temple, but he also 'inadvertently' predicted the coming of Messiah before the destruction of the temple.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[HTacianas]

Hi HT,

Also, according to the prophecy given to Daniel, your writer not only 'inadvertently' predicted the final destruction of the Jewish temple, but he also 'inadvertently' predicted the coming of Messiah before the destruction of the temple.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

And maybe he did.

 

[miamited]

This explains it fairly well:

Book of Daniel - Wikipedia

Hi HT,

According to your source, the writings of Daniel are a part of what is known as the Ketuvim. According to Jewish understanding, the writings of the Ketuvim are also divinely inspired writings. Also, according to your source, it makes the claim that the book of Daniel is a 2nd century writing, but offers no evidence to support that claim.

The ketuvim itself, makes no claim as to any different time of writing than what is stated in the writing itself. In fact, myJewishlearning.com says this about the time of the writings found in ketuvim: Most of the individual books in Ketuvim were written or at least put in final form in Judea during the period of Persian and Hellenistic rule, from the fifth through the second centuries BCE. The Temple in Jerusalem, destroyed in the Babylonian conquest of 586, had been rebuilt around 515. The text of the Torah was standardized not long after, but there was no more prophecy after Malachi.

According to hebrewforchristians.com, the writings of Daniel fall into the 'histories' section of ketuvim. Thus, they are offered as historical records that one would understand were in existence before ketuvim was gathered together as we find it today. So, when the first Jews began to cobble together these writings to create what they named 'ketuvim', these records of history already existed. Do you know when ketuvim came to be?

So, I'd want to see what evidences your source is basing its claim on that the writings of Daniel didn't exist before the 2nd century B.C.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[HTacianas]

Hi HT,

According to your source, the writings of Daniel are a part of what is known as the Ketuvim. According to Jewish understanding, the writings of the Ketuvim are also divinely inspired writings. Also, according to your source, it makes the claim that the book of Daniel is a 2nd century writing, but offers no evidence to support that claim.

The ketuvim itself, makes no claim as to any different time of writing than what is stated in the writing itself. In fact, myJewishlearning.com says this about the time of the writings found in ketuvim: Most of the individual books in Ketuvim were written or at least put in final form in Judea during the period of Persian and Hellenistic rule, from the fifth through the second centuries BCE. The Temple in Jerusalem, destroyed in the Babylonian conquest of 586, had been rebuilt around 515. The text of the Torah was standardized not long after, but there was no more prophecy after Malachi.

According to hebrewforchristians.com, the writings of Daniel fall into the 'histories' section of ketuvim. Thus, they are offered as historical records that one would understand were in existence before ketuvim was gathered together as we find it today. So, when the first Jews began to cobble together these writings to create what they named 'ketuvim', these records of history already existed. Do you know when ketuvim came to be?

So, I'd want to see what evidences your source is basing its claim on that the writings of Daniel didn't exist before the 2nd century B.C.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

You apparently accept the Jews claim that Daniel is older for no other reason than someone declared it to be. If you accept that, then fine. I'm not going to argue the point.

But by the same argument you would also have to accept the apocrypha. Most protestants don't. But Christianity does.

 

[miamited]

Hi HT,

Thanks for your response:

You apparently accept the Jews claim that Daniel is older for no other reason than someone declared it to be.

No, I'm willing to investigate your understanding. I've asked what evidence is there to support your timeline. So far, all you've produced is the exact same thing that you're accusing me of. Accepting a particular timeline because someone declared it to be. In your case, that someone is an article on wiki. In my case it is the Scriptures. The writings of Daniel are written in first person narrative. That suggests that the person writing, is also the person doing the action. There are repeated statements such as, "I Daniel..." At such and such a time a "vision came to me". "As I was doing..." and then goes on to describe something that the writer claims that he was doing.

If a narrative is written by someone else, then it would generally have statements such as, "Daniel did this...". "Daniel said this...". So, all I'm asking is, based on the literary construct of the writing, what evidence do you have that this first person narrative wasn't written by the person that the narrative makes repeated claims that it was?

Further, I find it odd that you are making the claim that I am apparently accepting 'the Jews claim'. Is there some reason that you find that I should not accept the claim of the people for whom Paul said carried the responsibility from God to write down His oracles?

So, are you able to support your position or not? Did you find out when ketuvim was first introduced to Jewish culture? I hold in my hand a bible, which is purported to be a fairly close rendition of the Holy Scriptures as handed down through the ages. The copy that I have is an NIV translation and holds a copyright date of 1973 for the first edition. However, I know without a doubt that things written in the pages of my bible are accounts that were written down long before 1973. My research on ketuvim explains that some of the writings are considered to be from the 5th century B.C. So, what are the chances that the word 'ketuvim' didn't come into general usage, or that this collection of writings that is referred to today as 'ketuvim', is just like my bible? Ketuvim came into general use about the second century B.C., but the writings that are included as a part of that body of work are much older. Jewish scholars do say the writings are older.

Do you have any idea whatsoever how holy the Jews have always held the Scriptures to be? That someone trying to insert some writing of ancient times, but proclaiming that they were new writings created only in the 2nd century B.C., what sort of outcry that would stir up among Judaism? So, knowing all of these things about the Scriptures, I'm asking you to prove me wrong with slightly more evidence than some wiki article tells me the writings were created in the 2nd century B.C.

After all, this is the apologetics forum and one should certainly be prepared to give an answer to those who ask. Here's an article worth reading if you're also interested, as I am, in looking at both sides of any evidence: Associates for Biblical Research - New Light on the Book of Daniel from the Dead Sea Scrolls

From apologeticspress.org:
So violent are the critical attacks on the book of Daniel that Josh McDowell chose to devote the third volume of his Evidence that Demands a Verdict series exclusively to the defense of Daniel.34 Indeed, the level of specificity with which Daniel predicts the future is troubling for the critic. This is why the ardent opponent of Christianity, the Greek philosopher Porphyry, already alleged in the third century A.D. that the book of Daniel was a forgery of the Maccabean Age (reported in Jerome’s Commentary on Daniel).35 The skeptical position has advanced little past Porphyry’s original pronouncement.

The Bible believer can appreciate the skeptic’s predicament. If the skeptic allows just one predictive prophecy to stand, then the Bible must be divine. So unbelievers must work feverishly to demolish the Bible’s reliability. They scratch and claw away at the data, insisting that everything in the Bible requires proof outside the Bible. They build mountainous theories on historical silence and critical presupposition. And they force believers to feel inadequate if they cannot discredit every skeptical assertion.

Yet the evidence forces the critic to a frightening conclusion: Daniel knows too much about the sixth century B.C. to be writing 350 years after the event, but he knows too much about late third and early second century B.C. to be writing 350 years before the event. So either the author was one of the most industrious historians who has ever lived, researching Babylonian and Persian records written in languages he most likely could not have read, and located in places almost certainly inaccessible, or he was a prophet of God, borne along by the Holy Spirit as Scripture indicates. There can be no compromise. “Daniel” was either a brilliantly researched, pseudonymous liar, or he was the great prophet Jewish and Christian tradition for over two millennia have claimed him to be. Let the reader decide.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[miamited]

Hi again HT,

Thanks for your response:

But by the same argument you would also have to accept the apocrypha.

I'm not clear on the connection you're making, that because I believe some of the Jewish scholars that Daniel was written in the time that it describes, I must also accept the apocryphal writings. I don't have any argument against when it is claimed that the apocryphal writings came to be. I'm honestly not that familiar with them. What dates would you find in question about them? Which of the books of the apocrypha do you find have a questionable date?

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[BigV]

The Bible believer can appreciate the skeptic’s predicament. If the skeptic allows just one predictive prophecy to stand, then the Bible must be divine.

Come on, we have clear examples of failed prophesy. Jesus, for example, predicted that the end of the age will come before "this generation", the generation of people hearing him, will pass away. Well, that generation has certainly passed away and yet, Jesus' second coming did not happen.

Read Matthew 24:29-35.

"Prophecy" is a rigged game.

When a "prediction" takes place, well, then it's a true prophecy. When a prediction fails, well, it must have been figurative, or the day is not a literal day, or there is a hidden meaning, etc...

Furthermore, Christians tend to be very skeptical of secular dating methods.

What dating methods have you used to determine that Daniel was written before the events he prophecied took place?

Secondly, here is a link to the secular source about (surprise!) failed Daniel's prophecies:
The Unfulfilled Predictions

Are you ready to throw the Bible out due to failed prophecies? I very much doubt it!

 

[miamited]

Hi bigv,

The main problem with your source and how they account the time of the 69 years is that they are not using the years as length of days that all of old covenant time keeping mentions. In God's explanations found in the old covenant Scriptures as to the length of a year, it is always 12, 30 day months. If we use God's measurement of a year, then 69x7x360 = 173,880 days. My source says the issuance of the decree to send Nehemiah to begin rebuilding Jerusalem was in 445 B.C. Here's a link to that source: Daniel’s 70 Weeks: The Precision of Prophecy – Chuck Missler – Koinonia House

Now we can work our way out, from 445 B.C. 173,880 days...and where do we end up? 173,880 divided by 365.25 = 476 solar years. 476 years from 445 B.C. brings us to the year 32 A.D. Keep in mind that there is no year '0'.

This in an effort to show that there is verifiable reason to believe that not only was the book of Daniel likely written in the time that it claims to be written, but that this particular prophecy, if figured using God's explanation of the number of days in a year, does bring us right smack dab into the time in which all of humanity, that believes that there was a man named Jesus, was teaching and preaching in Jerusalem. Which is exactly what the prophecy claims of itself to be telling us.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[BigV]

If we use God's measurement of a year, then 69x7x360 = 173,880 days.

I can predict with almost 100% accuracy that is how Christians will cling to their Bibles whenever there is a failure of prophecy. Everyone does it.

A day could be 1,000 years (2 Peter 3:8) or one year is 173,880 days, per your calculation of Daniel.

Fuzzy math can make any prophecy work.

Here is how a failed prophecy works in other cults:
When Prophecy Fails - Wikipedia

 

[Nihilist Virus]

This is a discussion that was encouraged by another poster to be handled as its own thread on the public forums of CF. I would ask that for any who offer input on this thread, that any such input be directly related to the verses of Daniel chapter 9:20-27.

Hi Ted. Nice to see you picking up the gauntlet, as they say.

You aren't making an explicit argument here that I can see, so let me paraphrase what I believe you're saying:

The prophet Daniel made specific predictions about the future that would have been highly improbable if not for divine foreknowledge. Since it is likely that he had divine foreknowledge to make his claim, it is likely that the Jewish God Jehovah exists. Since the prophecy was about Christ, it follows that the Jewish God is the Christian God.

Is that your argument?

The purpose of this discussion is to determine first, whether this passage of the Scriptures was written in the time that the Scriptures claim that it was,

Right, yes, but my experience with Christians is that they generally reject forensic evidence that doesn't align with their predetermined conclusion. Is that going to happen here? To be fair, there is the possibility that the prophecy is genuine, but that the oldest surviving copy is dated too late (later than the predicted events).

But this is all a moot point until the issue of prophecy is addressed. If you read Deuteronomy 18:15-22, you'll see that false prophets are to be put to death. So please, riddle me this: How can you put a false prophet to death if all they have to do is merely claim that their prophecy won't come true for 500 years? The notion of a far-future prophecy makes this mandate in Deuteronomy absolutely toothless. The notion of a far-future prophecy makes it so that one could literally prophesy anything whatsoever, so long as one does so in the name of the correct God.

Far-future prophecy is lunacy. Here's how it really works:

1. A prophet correctly predicts the near future
2. His prophecy comes true, indicating that he has contact with God
3. The prophet then speaks on behalf of God

Why is this necessary? As it says in the passage, the Jews were terrified to look upon God or hear his voice.

and second, what bearing that 'time and place' of the writing has upon the message that it offers to Daniel, and to us.

Until you square this issue away, again, this is moot.

I'm going to open with a word of prayer and anyone who is not ok with that is free to skip over the following paragraph:

Father, I ask that your wisdom and understanding be made known to all who participate in this discussion. I trust in your word that it is your will that everyone come to salvation through the proclamation of the gospel and it is in upholding your will in that, that I offer these words. I ask that you provide me, through your Spirit, the words that might make a difference in the hearts of those who have yet to find you. That this will be an opening for some to seek to diligently find you. In Jesus name I ask these things. Amen.

You're opening with a word of prayer and then there's nothing else. What exactly is your argument? Is it what I deduced or something else?

 

[BigV]

So please, riddle me this: How can you put a false prophet to death if all they have to do is merely claim that their prophecy won't come true for 500 years?

Good question. But also consider that with God one day is like 1,000 years

 

[miamited]

Hi NV,

Thanks for your response:

Is that your argument?

Yes.

Right, yes, but my experience with Christians is that they generally reject forensic evidence that doesn't align with their predetermined conclusion. Is that going to happen here? To be fair, there is the possibility that the prophecy is genuine, but that the oldest surviving copy is dated too late (later than the predicted events).

Possibly. I'll look at opposing evidence, but if I must agree with it, then yes I may reject it. There is, in my understanding, more than a 'fair' possibility. As I posted in a previous thread, the book of Daniel is written as most of the other prophetic books are written. The books of Ezekiel and Isaiah and Jeremiah, etc. all are written in this form using the personal pronouns that infer that the person doing the action is also the one doing the writing.

If we go through the book of Genesis, those writings are all written in a manner that would infer that someone other than the one who did the action is doing the writing. When Moses goes to Pharaoh, we don't read of Moses speaking to him, "I said to Pharaoh...'. It is written, 'So God spoke to Moses and told him to tell Pharaoh...' This could clearly be someone else recounting the event. But the rule of literary construct is that when someone speaks as if they are actually doing the speaking, then that should be the understanding.

Then we have the words of Jesus, some 500 years later referring not only to Daniel, but also of this very prophecy. When you see these things, spoken of by the prophet Daniel, happening...' Then we have an inference to the exact time that Daniel spoke of, coming from the mouth of Jesus.

As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it and said, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes."

Jesus had expected the Jews to know about the time of his visitation to them. They were have supposed to understand, through the prophecy given to Daniel, when he was to come. The wise men from the east knew that he was to due. When they questioned Herod, his wise men knew that the Messiah was supposed to be born in Bethlehem, which is what then took the wise men on into Bethlehem.

So, I think it should be understood that Jesus considered Daniel to be a prophet and Jesus considered his writtngs to be important and Jesus didn't say anything that would infer that the writings were relatively new by saying something like, "Even those things written 'about' Daniel." No! He specifically mentions Daniel as a prophet. And ties what he's telling his disciples about the last days and the destruction of the temple to the very words of that prophet.

What evidence do we have that the book of Daniel was written in the 600s BC, and what evidence is used for a later date of composition, after the time of Antiochus Epiphanes? – Evidence for Christianity

If you read this link, you will notice that one of the evidences that the date that is offered by some on this thread can't be the actual date, is that we really do have proof that Daniel was included in the Septuagint written about 180 B.C. In the careful reflection and consideration that Jews give to the Scriptures, there really isn't likely any chance that a book that had just been written within the last 40-50 years, but supposed to give an account of things 400 years earlier, would have been accepted so quickly.

The jewish culture has always held the Scriptures in very, very high regard. They would have wanted some attestation to the authenticity of such a writing, added in 400 years after the fact, was in fact authentic.

So, I believe wholeheartedly that the literary construct of the writing; the fact that is is found in writings that precede the Maccabbean period; that Jesus referred to the writings and the prophet Daniel as a prophet; give much greater evidence to be considered that the writing is much more likely to be older than the 2nd century B.C.

The evidence that it was written sometime in the middle of the 2nd century B.C., to me, is extremely tenuous.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Good question. But also consider that with God one day is like 1,000 years

Ha, yes, creative... but it is the people who are tasked with executing the false prophets, not God.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Hi Ted, thanks for the response. However, I cannot overlook the fact that you have once again redacted and ignored my main point. Furthermore, you have indicated yet again that you have come here in bad faith:

Possibly. I'll look at opposing evidence, but if I must agree with it, then yes I may reject it.

Unless I'm somehow reading this wrong, you're saying that you will indeed reject physical evidence if it does not favor your preferred conclusion. That is simply not how we go about adding to the wealth of human knowledge. Quite the opposite.

I think it's you who has hardened his heart. Just think about that.

 

[miamited]

Hi Ted, thanks for the response. However, I cannot overlook the fact that you have once again redacted and ignored my main point. Furthermore, you have indicated yet again that you have come here in bad faith:



Unless I'm somehow reading this wrong, you're saying that you will indeed reject physical evidence if it does not favor your preferred conclusion. That is simply not how we go about adding to the wealth of human knowledge. Quite the opposite.

I think it's you who has hardened his heart. Just think about that.

Hi NV,

I disagree with your assessment of my heart, but that's not what this thread is concerning.

I have not come here in bad faith. I've just made the point that it's true in any discussion between two opposing ideas that some of one sides evidence will be rejected by the other. I think one would be a simpleton to not know and acknowledge that truth. I said I would look at any evidence offered, and I will. But if you would ever hope to expect that anyone that you might discuss with will just always accept any evidence that you offer as being the truth of things then I'm afraid that you're likely to always be throwing up that gauntlet of, "well, they're closed minded because they don't agree with my evidence." So, I think that you are reading my position wrong.

I'm sorry that you feel that I've 'redacted and ignored' your main point. I reread your post, and I find that you make a couple of points. You rephrased my position and asked me if your understanding was correct? I agreed that it was. Obviously, that must not have been your main point.

Right, yes, but my experience with Christians is that they generally reject forensic evidence that doesn't align with their predetermined conclusion.

I addressed that issue, so obviously that is not your main point.

But this is all a moot point until the issue of prophecy is addressed.

Prophecy is what is being addressed in this entire thread, so obviously that is not your main point.

You then make the claim, which I must assume that you believe to be true:

Far-future prophecy is lunacy. Here's how it really works:

1. A prophet correctly predicts the near future
2. His prophecy comes true, indicating that he has contact with God
3. The prophet then speaks on behalf of God

Why is this necessary? As it says in the passage, the Jews were terrified to look upon God or hear his voice.

I'm honestly not understanding why the Jews being terrified to look upon God or hear His voice, has any bearing on the issue of prophecy. If that's your main point then I'd ask you to rephrase in a more understandable wording by adding after that statement how that might have some bearing on prophecy. As far as your claim that 'Here's how it works', I would have to believe that you really haven't read much of the prophecies, nor understood that Jesus did recognize and quote many of the prophecies.

According to the Scriptures, when he began his ministry he quoted several words from the prophet Isaiah and regularly referred to Isaiah as a prophet. As I've already mentioned, he also referred to Daniel as a prophet. Practically every book of the gospel accounts quote some old covenant prophecy.

However, this exercise is strictly about the prophecy given to Daniel and I am first attempting to secure some agreement that it may have, I believe it absolutely was, but as you don't have the same worldview that I have, just some agreement that the words of Daniel may have been written in the 5th century B.C. or there abouts. You have already agreed that such is a possibility and now I am attempting to secure that position.

Unlike you, I believe that the first thing to resolve is that the words of the Scriptures that are claimed to be prophetic, were written when it was claimed that they were. Because that's the frist issue to determine if they are, in fact, prophetic.

BTW, I didn't say that I would reject offered arguments, but that I may. Just as you have the option in this discussion to reject arguments that I make or propose, I also hold that same right. Let's face it, if you weren't rejecting my claims to support the earlier writing of Daniel, we wouldn't be having at least half of this discussion. Surely you would allow me the same right of rejection of evidence that you yourself use.

God bless,
In Christ, ted